Mixed ruling on sex offender residency law

See earlier comments

2-1-2010 California:

The state Supreme Court left the door open Monday to contentions that strict restrictions on where some registered sex offenders can live are unconstitutional, but turned away other legal challenges to a 2006 law that toughened laws against sexual crimes.

The mixed ruling marked the second time in a week that the high court took up questions of how to deal with the state’s sex offenders under Proposition 83, passed by voters in 2006.

Today’s ruling came in combined challenges to parts of the law from four men who are registered sex offenders — two of whom lived in San Diego County. Among other things, Proposition 83 prohibited registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of any school or park where children regularly gather.

The men were paroled from state custody after serving sentences for non-sex crimes, and after the law went into effect. They each claimed that the living restrictions applied to them on that parole could force them to leave their homes and that there was virtually no place in the cities where they lived where they would be in compliance with the law.

Five members of the court rejected challenges that applying the law to them violated their constitutional rights against applying laws or increasing punishments retroactively.

But the court majority said it did not have enough evidence to settle other issues, including claims that the law is too vague, or that it violates the defendants’ right to privacy and to travel.

The court sent the issue back to lower courts to conduct potentially lengthy evidentiary hearings that would provide more information on those questions and others.

Two justices dissented, saying that Proposition 83 regulations could not be applied to anyone who was convicted of a sex crime requiring lifetime registration before the law took effect in 2006. ..Source.. Greg Moran, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER