8-20-2010 Indiana:
VALPARAISO | Portage resident Terry Hough admits upfront he was convicted of rape in Pennsylvania in 1993.
But the 46-year-old argues in a legal petition that he should not be forced to register as a sex offender in Porter County because at the time of his offense and conviction there were no registry laws in either Pennsylvania or Indiana.
"The Indiana Supreme Court has held that the sex offender registration requirements cannot be applied retroactively to one who committed an offense before the Act without violating the state constitution," according to his suit targeting the state of Indiana.
The petition asks the court to set a hearing and make a determination in his favor.
Deputy Prosecutor Cheryl Polarek, who handles sex offense cases in the county, agrees with Hough's reading of the law, but she said the decision will be up to the courts and state attorney general's office.
She said one or two others have tried to make the same case, but, unlike Hough, they did not follow the proper procedure.
Hough said he pleaded guilty to his offense on Aug. 19, 1993, was released from custody in 1997 and completed parole in 1998.
Indiana enacted its registry law in 1994 and Pennsylvania followed in 1996, he said.
He said the Porter County Sheriff's Department continues to notify him in writing that he must register as a "sexual or violent offender."
"I am not now required to register in Pennsylvania or in any jurisdiction other than Porter County, Indiana," the suit says.
Hough said his only other criminal conviction is for misdemeanor disorderly conduct in 2006 in Porter County. ..Source.. Bob Kasarda
August 20, 2010
Convicted rapist from Portage challenging sex registry
November 20, 2009
DSP worker charged with covering for sex offender
11-20-2009 Delaware:
A civilian employee of the State Police is accused of intentionally entering false information into a database about a sex offender during the registration process.
Police say Finisha Mills was living with Michael Tilghman at the Persimmon Tree Apartments in Dover, and from July 27th to November 5th, Mills registered Tilghman, a Tier 3, or high-risk offender, as homeless.
Mills turned herself in Thursday at Troop 3 in Camden, and is out on bail pending a December 4th Common Pleas Court hearing on 8 counts of entering false information into the Delaware Justice Information System and one count each of official misconduct and conspiracy. ..Source.. Frank Gerace
May 6, 2009
Few residents respond to the sex offender registry
5-6-2009 Cayman Islands:
The period allowing for public comment on the draft of Cayman’s new Sex Offender Registry Bill concluded in April with only five people providing a response.
At the beginning of the consultation period, Minister of Health and Human Services Hon Anthony Eden had said, “Through this public consultative process, my ministry welcomes greater collaboration with government and non-government agencies as a means of raising awareness of this social issue that is threatening the stability of our families.”
As to the five people who contributed feedback, the Ministry’s Chief Officer Diane Montoya said, “The responses focus on whether the Registry should be public or private.”
While two respondents felt that it should be made public, another two felt the information should be kept private. Three respondents also questioned whether such a registry would defeat the purpose of rehabilitation, thereby countering reintegration efforts.
“This information will now be used to formulate a policy recommendation to Cabinet for consideration in revising the Bill,” said Ms Montoya, adding that the bill is “unlikely” to come into effect by June.
In the United States, government statistics suggest there are more than 100,000 sex offenders in the population, or one offender for every 3,000 persons. The American government knows this because of a nationwide Sex Offenders Registry, which includes all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The first state to create a sex offender registry was California, in 1948. However, in the last 15 years, due to a series of highly publicised cases involving sex crimes against children, national attention focused on the possible risks that convicted sex offenders can pose to communities when they are released.
The result is that every parent in the US today can go to the National Sex Offenders Registry website, key in their state and town [or zip code] and a list of convicted sex offenders living in their area will immediately appear, complete with physical description, list of conviction dates, their various alias and often a police photo.
The issue of creating a Cayman registry has been discussed and debated for years.
In February of this year, the Sex Offender Registry Bill was ultimately tabled in the Legislative Assembly as a Discussion Draft and provisions were made to allow 60 days of public consultation.
West Bay Police Area Commander and Chief Inspector Angelique Howell became one of the driving forces behind the concept of a local Sex Offender Registry after her experiences of heading the Family Support Unit for two years.
Regardless of the little public comment, Inspector Howell’s position has been made loud and clear. “I am absolutely in support of a Sex Offender Registry. I think it is a must for Cayman,” she said.
She also feels the information shouldn’t be readily available to the public, as is the case in the United States.
Inspector Howell believes that with Cayman’s compact size (“where everyone knows everyone”) there is potential for abuse. “Also, if the names of offenders were available to the public, there is a good possibility that their victims would be revealed, and this is something that we would not want to happen, especially in the case of children,” she said.
“It is important to have a registry which is accessible to the police as well as various government agencies; because I believe for many sex offenders this is a lifelong problem and a permanent challenge for them to overcome. And so in order to safeguard the community, these offenders need to be monitored over a lifetime. But we also need to be aware of their human rights as well. Once a sex offender is convicted and serves their time and is then in therapy, they have some right to privacy,” she said.
She offers a “however” in terms of staffing child-related businesses, such as a child-care facility. In these cases, she said there should be a registry where the public can apply to have the potential employee checked against the sex offenders’ records. Access would be based on a specific request.
“In fact, I believe that there should be two registries, one for sex offenders that have been convicted and another one for what is called ‘people of interest’ relating to various sex crimes or offences … I feel that the public would need to make a formal application to have limited access to these records,” Inspector Howell said. “But for the police, having a registry will be a very good thing, and I’m very optimistic that it will happen.” ..News Source.. by Steven Knipp
April 19, 2009
IL- Illinois Senate Approves Sex Offender Legislation
All I can say is, reducing the places (from 1,100) where folks can register will cause many bottlenecks in the remaining 102. I see major scheduling problems for RSOs and overload those registry workers, mistakes will abound.
4-19-2009 Illinois:
The Illinois Senate has approved a bill that would require all sex offenders to register with their county sheriff.
S.B. 1702 was initiated by the Illinois Sheriffs' Association and sponsored by state Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Hinsdale.
Currently, sex offenders in incorporated areas are required to register with the chief of police, while only sex offenders in unincorporated areas register with the county sheriff.
The bill would establish a more uniform way of keeping tabs on sex offenders and would reduce the burden on some municipalities, Dillard said.
According to Greg Sullivan, executive director of the Illinois Sheriffs' Association, the bill would reduce the number of locations where sex offenders must register from about 1,100 to 102 locations.
The requirement would not apply to Chicago. Sex offenders who live in Chicago would continue to register with the Chicago Police Department. ..News Source.. by CBS2 Chicago.com
March 9, 2009
WA- Gov. Gregoire Announces New Sex Offender Tracking Database
How can anyone be proud to announce spending $5,000,000.00 for a phone book of 18,136 former sex offenders ($275.00 each listing without annual costs), when they Yellow pages comes FREE and contains tens of thousands more people. How can this protect the public from new sex crimes when it is a well know fact that, 95% of new sex crimes come from people who have never before committed a sex offense. I guess that -in reality- makes the Yellow pages more valuable for finding those who commit sex crimes.
3-9-2009 Washington:
At a press conference this morning in Olympia, Gov. Chris Gregoire announced Washington's new $5 million online sex offender database to track the whereabouts of the 18,136 sex offenders living here. Well, the system actually knows the location of 13,254 convicted sex offenders, leaving 4,882 unaccounted for.
The database pulls up 835 known sex offenders living in Seattle. For example, within a two mile radius of The Deluxe Bar and Grill on Broadway there are 271 offenders. If you plug in the address of Seattle Center, you'll see that 245 known offenders live within 2 miles of the Space Needle.
This is "community policing at its best," Gregoire said. "Every penny has been well spent."
The new online database allows anyone to search for potential sexual predators living within a two mile, half mile or quarter mile radius of their home, work, church or school.
Gregoire was motivated to create the tracking system after the July 2007 kidnapping and murder of 12-year-old Zina Linnik in Tacoma.
"We have a much better handle of where our sex offenders are living," Gregoire said.
In addition to where they live, there is also a photo of the offender, as well as their age, height, weight, eye and hair color, along with their race and sometimes, but not allows, the crime, or crimes, they were convicted of.
While this system is meant to help keep people informed of the whereabouts of known sex offenders, "It's not perfect," said Don Pierce, the executive director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs. "Evil people will continue to do evil things," he said.
By entering your full name, street address and e-mail address, the system will notify you when a registered sex offender moves into your neighborhood. ..News Source.. by Keith Vance
March 4, 2009
OH- Indictment dismissed for non-sex offender who didn't register
3-4-2009 Ohio:
NEWARK — Danny Seals won’t be returning to prison, but that’s only a minor victory in his battle to be rid of the “sex offender” label.
The state dismissed an indictment this morning that alleges Seals, 49, failed to register and provide notice of a change of address — both requirements imposed on those named in the Ohio Sex Offender Registry and Notification.
Licking County Assistant Prosecutor Alice Bond said that her office had no plans to reindict Seals, as had been done in December, and that some errors made by the state, including placing Seals in the incorrect middle-tier of sex offender, made the dismissal prudent.
Seals and his attorney Eric Brehm had a different take on the ouster.
“At the end of the day, you know why you’re walking,” Brehm said to his client after the paperwork was signed. “It’s because it’s unfair.”
Seals was convicted of one count of kidnapping and four counts of abduction for holding his estranged wife hostage, along with two kids and a woman briefly, during a 1994 standoff with police in Mount Vernon. There was no allegation of sexual motivation or even a mention of the word “sex” in the police report or subsequent investigative materials.
When he was released in 1999, Seals learned he had been classified as a child victim offender under Megan's Law, the predecessor of the Adam Walsh Act.
There is no separate registry for child victim offenders so they are rolled into the state SORN database and tasked with sex offender registration requirements — and their notoriety too.
Seals contacted The Advocate by letter from his cell at the Licking County Justice Center in September and in an interview at the jail later that month talked about the persecution he suffered because of his picture on the Web site.
His bond was modified to personal recognizance and he was released from jail Oct. 3, but the case was still active until today.
Brehm believes that local prosecution was a mistake that has now been corrected.
“Occasionally, the government gets it wrong,” Brehm wrote in a statement to The Advocate. “Mr. Seals has complied with what he believed was required of him. In all fairness, this matter should be and is over.” ..News Source.. by staff reports
February 17, 2009
CA- Out-of-state offenders need not register
2-17-2008 California:
A federal judge's decision to dismiss an indictment against a Brownsville man, charged with failing to register as a sex offender, got a reception from residents as chilly as the patches of snow that line roads in the foothill community.
Nedde Max Murphy, Jr., 41, convicted in Nevada in 1988 of criminal lewdness with a child under 14, failed to register when moving from Idaho, according to a criminal complaint filed in federal court in Sacramento.
Lawrence K. Karlton, a federal judge in Sacramento, ruled that Congress overstepped its authority in a 2006 law requiring sex offenders to update their registration when they relocate to another state.
Federal prosecutors have appealed Karlton's ruling and a hearing in U.S. District Court in Sacramento is set Wednesday.
The judge's ruling isn't right, said Brownsville resident John Slazas and most others interviewed Monday.
A remote, rural region like the foothills provides "perfect prey for a predator," Slazas, 47, said in supporting the law requiring sex offenders to register when moving from one state to another.
"I want him out of here," Slazas said of Murphy.
"Our judicial system is falling apart," he added of the judge's decision. "What's his motivation in making a ruling like that?"
Another Brownsville resident said Murphy's residence, about a mile from the youth center in the community, would be passed by teens on their way to the center.
"That's crazy," the resident, who declined to give her name, said of the judge's ruling.
Brownsville resident Bonnie Godden, 65, said the judge's decision to dismiss the indictment "smacks of the ACLU" and would allow sex offenders to avoid registration merely by moving from one state to another.
The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) has no involvement in this case.
Cynthia D'Orazi, 42, took issue with the federal ruling as well. The requirement that sex offenders register "should follow them where they go" when moving, she said.
Kay Stadtman, who said she met Murphy at a yard sale she held last summer, later learned of his sex offender status when he was arrested in December for failing to register in California after his move from Idaho.
"I was kind of shocked," Stadtman said about the status of Murphy, who lives about a block away. Stadtman said Murphy should be required to register.
The criminal complaint filed against Murphy in December in federal court recounts a deputy U.S. Marshall learning that Murphy might be receiving disability benefits from the state of California. Murphy had registered in Idaho in 2007 as a sex offender but had not done so in California, according to the complaint.
In November, the marshal went to Brownsville where the postmaster said she'd seen Murphy a week earlier in the post office. The marshal said the Yuba County Sheriff's Department told him Murphy had not tried to register here as a sex offender.
A person who said she knows Murphy, but declined to be identified, said Murphy hasn't repeated any crime since his 1988 conviction in Nevada.
She said she understands the reactions of residents who don't know Murphy.
"If I didn't know him, I'd be pretty pissed he's here," said the woman, who believes he should register as a sex offender.
Murphy is not a predator or a threat to Brownsville residents, including those traveling to the youth center, she said.
The ruling made by Judge Karlton was one of two made last week related to sex offender registrations, including the one made in the Murphy case.
In the other case Karlton noted that those subject to law have often committed the most reprehensible of crimes — "making it difficult to give their claims the dispassionate analysis the law requires."
"Nonetheless, it is the sworn duty of judges to do so..." he wrote.
..News Source.. by Ryan McCarthy/Appeal-Democrat
February 16, 2009
Judges Should Control Sex Offender Registration, ABA House Says
2-16-2009 National:
Congress should amend existing statutes to allow judges to determine whether juveniles convicted of sex crimes should be required to register as sex offenders, the ABA’s policy-making House of Delegates said today.
Federal law currently require all youths 14 years old or older who are convicted of sex-related offenses to register as sex offenders for at least 25 years. The House resolution urged that judges be able to make those determinations on a case-by-case basis.
Resolution 101A (PDF) passed on an overwhelming voice vote. ..News Source.. by Edward A. Adams
February 6, 2009
CA- Federal Judge Unhappy With Flip-Flopping Fed
2-6-2009 California:
It's never a good idea to make a judge on the brink of a five-month-long death penalty trial think he's wasting his time.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Denise Barton learned that lesson this week, when Northern District of California Judge William Alsup ordered her to explain why the government decided to dismiss a sex offender registry prosecution less than two weeks after Alsup had sorted through extensive briefing on the statute's constitutionality.
In court Wednesday, Alsup kept his voice low and made sure to describe prosecutors in the office as "excellent." But the judge seemed disturbed that Barton pushed hard to detain defendant Gary Hardemann in December, only to toss the case this week.
"You went after him hammer and tongs to keep him in custody," Alsup said. The judge released Hardemann even after Barton claimed he was a danger to the community, and that more counts were coming.
"When you are charging a case, I urge you to be ready to go to trial," said Alsup, who will preside over a rare capital trial later this month.
Barton acknowledged Alsup's frustration, but said the dismissal became necessary after a newly discovered legal hurdle arose in recent weeks. Prosecutors then doubted their ability to prove the case, she said.
"We did what we believed was the responsible thing," said Barton, who coordinates the office's sex crimes prosecutions.
According to Hardemann's federal public defender, Daniel Blank, the case appears to be the first in the Northern District of California brought under the recently passed Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. Hardemann was convicted of two state law sex crimes in the 1980s, which were expunged. Still, the government contends Hardemann is required to register under SORNA, and that he failed to do so.
Blank sought to dismiss the indictment with various challenges to the statute, including a facial attack invoking the Commerce Clause. Alsup turned him down.
After that ruling, though, the government grew unsure of whether Hardemann technically moved out of San Francisco in 2007. Changing residences triggers SORNA's reporting requirements, Barton said. Since Hardemann went to Mexico for a few months -- but returned to San Francisco -- Barton said she and others in the office doubted their proof.
Still left unsettled is the fate of Alsup's constitutional analysis.
"I think that was a close call," the judge said. "I ruled in the government's favor, but I had it in the back of my mind that Mr. Blank would take it up on appeal and the 9th Circuit would sort it out."
Not surprisingly, Barton thought Alsup should let the order stand, while Blank said he should withdraw it. Alsup took the matter under submission.
"I'm concerned with having that opinion out there. Somebody may put more weight on it than it deserves," he said.
The judge closed by reminding prosecutors of their immense power over citizens that "don't have the same resources" as the government.
"Please proceed with caution and good judgment," he said. ..News Source.. by Dan Levine, The Recorder
January 7, 2009
NM- New federal laws mandate sex offender registration guidelines
If the new law is written, or interpreted, as explained in this article then there are insane provisions which are impossible for many prior offenders to comply with (highlighted shows one example). This law protects no one and harms many, and some of those are not even offenders. See Table (at end of article) from a study showing the harm caused by registries.
1-7-2009 New Mexico:
With the turn of a calendar page, a new year begins. With it come new federal guidelines for the registration of convicted sex offenders in the form of the Adam Walsh Child Safety and Protection Act.
The federal act was passed in 2007, and the final guidelines were issued in 2008, Regina Chacon of the State Department of Public Safety (DPS) said. Now it's New Mexico's turn to come into compliance with the federal statute.
Compliancy with the act includes juvenile registration, retroactive registration and technology enhancements that include mapping of registrants, e-mail notifications of their locations and a link to a national database.
Chacon said during the January legislative session, which begins its 60-day session on Jan. 20., the act will be introduced to the legislature and the governor will have to sign the bill into effect.
"We have tried to come up with something that will comply with the Adam Walsh bill. We are already compliant with the requirements for our Web site and database," Chacon said. "We will have to start the juvenile and retroactive registrations."
An example of when retroactive registry would happen is if someone is convicted on a burglary charge in 2009, after the act goes into effect, and was convicted of criminal sexual penetration in the first degree in 1975. "They were not required to register then, but they would be now," Chacon said.
She went on to say that with the retroactive registration in place, registered sex offender numbers would increase as well as the research it takes to put them in the state's database.
"We do in-depth research of conviction and court documents," Chacon said. "We will not put someone on the registry until we have absolutely verified the conviction. We will have to get that information from court documents, which, with the older records, those documents are the sole source. That will probably be one of the hardest tasks."
Currently, the state will place a juvenile on the sex offender registry if they are convicted and sentenced under adult sanctions. "A 17-year-old convicted as an adult would have to register," Chacon said. "Under the Adam Walsh Act, they will be registered even if the juvenile is simply adjudicated."
Criticism and concern
Both the retroactive and juvenile registration aspects of the federal law have been criticized, and Chacon says she understands the conflicting feelings.
"You have someone who committed a sex crime 30-some years ago and hasn't been in trouble since. Is that fair, to register them now?" she asked. "But we also see studies and research that shows with the majority of predators, for every crime they are caught for, there are several others they aren't ever caught for."
In regards to juvenile registration, Chacon questions if it is fair for an 18-year-old to have to register for the rest of his or her life because of a mistake or mental illness.
"But we have seen a situation where a foster child in Texas molested his sister and brother. Nobody knew because the matter was adjudicated," Chacon said. "He then comes to New Mexico and is seeking treatment, which is admirable, but he molested again. He had been molesting children since he was 12 but the matter was always adjudicated.
"We know the bullying that can happen because of something like this, the psychological impact of registration. We are trying to come up with an alternative that will meet our needs as a state, but we have to err on the side of caution and believe in the registry."
Chacon went on to call the registration an "excellent tool" saying the purpose of the new federal legislation is to enhance the registry.
"There is the possibility that there will be ramifications from state to state that were not anticipated," she said. "It's up to us to create something that will benefit us as a state."
Three-tier system
The federal act also establishes three tiers of registration time periods - 15 years, 25 years and a lifetime. A Tier 3 crime such as aggravated sexual abuse, abusive sexual contact or the kidnapping of a minor by someone other than a parent or guardian would warrant a lifetime registration and a renewal visit to the local sheriff's department every three months.
A 15-year registration is for Tier 2 crimes such as sex trafficking, coercion and enticement or transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity. A Tier 2 sex offender must renew their registration every six months.
A Tier 1 offender is anything that is less severe than a Tier 2 or 3 crime. Their registration lasts 15 years, and they must renew their information with the sheriff's department annually.
Det. Sgt. John Gordon of the Valencia County Sheriff's Department is the officer tasked with tracking and monitoring the sex offenders living in Valencia County. He is hopeful the new federal law will streamline the various state registration systems.
Gordon said, for example, if a sex offender moves to New Mexico, he or she has 10 days to notify the department of public safety. However, in Las Vegas, Nev., offenders have 72 hours to notify authorities.
"If you are convicted in Wisconsin, you have to register there even if you are living in New Mexico," Gordon said.
--Note: Given the retroactive nature of this law, how does someone incapacitated in a nursing home today, go back to where they lived 20-30-40-50 years ago, and register there then come back to the nursing home, especially if it involves different states. This is insane, but the lawmakers must have been as well. Never forget, Mark Foley was the author of the registraion portion of this law, he was driven our of Congress due to his secretive messages with underage Pages in Congress, and he is not prosecuted for that when on the registry there are others doing the same.
Chacon said DPS felt that the 10 days allowed in New Mexico was reasonable. "They have to establish a residence, make an appointment with the sheriff's department and go register," she said. "The federal act says three days, so we'll put that in and see what the final decision is."
NM registration
and notification
New Mexico isn't alone in registering sex offenders. According to Chacon, federal law requires all 50 states to have a sex offender registry.
"Federal law requires the 'sending' state to notify the 'receiving' state of a move by a sex offender," Chacon said. "The state the offender was convicted in notifies New Mexico, and we notify the sheriff's department of the county the offender is moving to. In New Mexico, offenders currently have 10 days to register with the county sheriff's department.
"If they do not register within that timeframe, the department will go out and try to locate the offender."
When an offender registers with a sheriff's department, he must provide his legal name and any aliases, date of birth, Social Security number, current address, place of employment, the sex offense convicted of and the date and place of the conviction.
With little exception, that information, plus a physical description including scars and tattoos, is put into the online database the state maintains of all the registered offenders living in the state.
Chacon said Social Security numbers aren't put on the Web site, and it is up to the department as to whether the sex offender's place of employment is listed.
"We report the offender's workplace if we feel that they will come in contact with children, and there are very few places where they won't," she said. "They would literally have to be on an oil rig in the middle of the ocean. A plumber, a handyman, working at a fast-food restaurant - they probably will."
Chacon went on to say that if a sex offender is retired, unemployed or is on disability or Social Security, they don't post that because there is no need. The department does post the residential address of the registered offenders.
"We review every single registration, and the final determination is up to us," she said. "We also rely a lot on the local sheriff's department to let us know what kind of business it is the offender works at. If it isn't a recognizable name, we don't know if it's a tire shop or a pizza place."
Gordon said each time an offender renews his registration, he signs a form acknowledging the New Mexico sex offender registration and notification statute.
According to Chacon, New Mexico is unique and special in that it registers all offenses against a minor or adult.
"The act focuses on violence against children," she said. "It includes kidnapping and false imprisonment of a child by someone other than a parent or guardian."
According to the state's registration and notification act, an offender must also disclose his status as a sex offender in writing when he begins employment, begins a vocation or enrolls as a student at an institution of higher education in New Mexico to the county sheriff for the county in which the school is located and to the law enforcement entity and registrar for the institution of higher education.
Offenders must also disclose their status in writing when enrolling as a student in a private or public school in New Mexico to the county sheriff for the county in which the school is located and to the principal of the school.
The act stipulates that an offender must "disclose his status as a sex offender in writing to his employer, supervisor or other person similarly situated, when he begins employment, begins a vocation or volunteers his services, regardless of whether the sex offender receives payment or other compensation ..."
If an offender's employment or enrollment status changes, he must again notify those same people in writing of the changes.
Changing information
When an offender notifies the local sheriff's department about a change either in their residence, job or school location, Chacon said the department notifies the state.
"We update our database no later than 24 hour after they give us the information," she said. "The database automatically updates the Web site every six hours."
In order to change an offender's information, be it a new home address or change of employment, there has to be an authorized document with the changes, Chacon said.
"The sheriff's department can't just call us. There has to be written notification from the offender with their new address," she said. "There is a process in place for verification."
If the offender notifies the sheriff's department and state that they are moving out of state, Chacon says DPS gives the offender all the information about the new state's requirements.
"We then notify the new state that they are coming. We give them a couple of weeks and do a follow-up to make sure they registered," she said. "It is a fourth-degree felony to not register. If we find out they lied to us and didn't register, we have a warrant issued."
Criminal background checks
To further protect the population, Chacon said DPS could conduct a background check of a person's criminal history in New Mexico for a $10 fee.
"In New Mexico, conviction records are open records," Chacon said. "As a good place to start, we recommend checking www.nmcourts.com." The Web site gives summaries of criminal cases throughout the state.
To do a criminal background check, Chacon says DPS needs an authorization for release. "An employer asks a prospective employee to sign what is basically a waiver," she said. "DPS is the central depository for criminal records, so first we do a name comparison. If there is no record, then that's that. If there is a hit, then we run the name, date of birth and Social Security number."
Chacon goes on to say that, if there is a record, the employer can see arrests and convictions for the individual requested. "We only release the records if all the information matches," she said. "If the person believes we are wrong, we will do an identification fingerprint for verification purposes only. In the nine years I've been with DPS, I've only seen one time when it was the completely wrong person."
In the case of many non-profit groups, such as YAFL and Little League, Chacon said DPS would usually waive the fee.
The state's sex offender database is also available for people to check for free via the Internet. "Business owners should be doing that anyway," Chacon said. "They should know who are the offenders around their business especially if they have a business aimed at children."
Roberta Scott, the director of the county's Small Business Development Center at the University of New Mexico-Valencia Campus, also recommends utilizing the state's database. If you are unsure, check the state's sex offender database," she said. "It's the least you should be doing. Plus it's free and public knowledge." ..News Source.. by Julia M. Dendinger News-Bulletin Staff Writer eAdvocate note: Reviewing this study was interesting but there were two charts which caught my eye, they follows:
Levenson, J. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2009). Collateral damage: Family members of registered sex offenders. American Journal of Criminal Justice.
eAdvocate note: Reviewing this study was interesting but there was one chart which caught my eye, it follows:
Monica L. P. Robbers PhD: Lifers on the Outside: Sex Offenders and Disintegrative Shaming . International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Vol. 53, No. 1, 5-28 (2009)
November 25, 2008
The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act and the Commerce Clause
11-25-2008
Abstract:
In 2006, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act ("SORNA") created a new federal crime of "failure to register" which is punishable by up to ten years imprisonment. Since that time, sex offenders across the country have been prosecuted even though the offenders had no prior connection to the federal criminal justice system. For almost all of the prosecutions under SORNA, the argued jurisdictional basis for federal prosecution has been that the sex offender travelled across state lines. Based upon this travel, which is an element of the crime of failure to register, the government has argued that the new registration crime is justified under Commerce Clause authority. An overwhelming majority of courts that have addressed Commerce Clause challenges have accepted the government's argument that interstate travel is a sufficient jurisdictional hook. However, a careful examination of existing Commerce Clause law demonstrates that these courts are mistaken. For the Commerce Clause to have any meaning and for the decisions in Lopez and Morrison to make sense, the alleged interstate travel must be connected to the underlying offense in fact and time. Despite the limitations of prior Supreme Court precedent, courts have enabled the government to prosecute sex offenders who crossed state lines years before SORNA was even enacted. Further, courts have not required any showing that the travel had any connection to the alleged offense of failing to register. While some have argued that the decision in Raich effectively ended the federalism revolution, SORNA expands federal jurisdiction into entirely new territory. As a result, this article concludes that courts should dismiss most indictments under SORNA based upon a lack of federal jurisdiction and/or Congress should amend SORNA to properly reflect the jurisdiction authorized under existing precedent. ..Source.. by Corey Rayburn Yung, John Marshall Law School, Chicago
November 12, 2008
SC- New SC law lessens penalties on sex offenders
11-12-2008 South Carolina:
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford signed a new sex offender bill into law in June that makes it illegal for a convicted sex offender from living within 1,000 feet of a school, daycare, church, or playground.
The law also reduces the penalty for sex offenders who fail to register with county sheriff’s offices, which state law requires offenders to do on a yearly basis for the rest of their lives.
Under Jessie’s Law, which Sanford signed in Myrtle Beach in 2006, the penalty for a convicted sex offender failing to register was a mandatory 90 days in jail, with no part of that sentence suspended.
The law signed in June, that penalty moves the charge from circuit court into magistrate’s court and will allow a magistrate to sentence an offender anywhere from one day to 30 days in jail, or fine him $500.
The new law won’t go into effect until 90 days after the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division implements mapping software into the state’s online sex offender registry that would allow uses to type in a street address to see the offenders living around that address.
SLED said it did not have the funding to add the mapping software and didn’t have any timeline when the software would be added.
Two state representatives from Horry County, Alan Clemmons and Thad Viers, sponsored the latest law and helped push it through the General Assembly and onto the governor’s desk.
Clemmons said the June law, also known as the Brady Bill, was a step toward strengthening offender laws and making South Carolina’s offender laws some of the toughest in the nation. “We work tirelessly to make sure that the public is protected, particularly with regard to the most vulnerable of our state,” Clemmons told News13.
Prosecutors and authorities working to track, register and prosecute sex offenders said the penalty passed with the Brady Bill was a sign that the legislature was softening the state’s sex offender laws.
“Anybody that were to take the Joan Brady Bill and call that a lessening of standards in South Carolina for sexual offenders is totally off point,” Clemmons said.
Clemmons said he wasn’t aware of the penalty included with the bill and that it was likely added when House and Senate members met to finalize the bill before presenting to the governor.
Clemmons said he still wasn’t aware of the penalty change when News13 asked him about it on Nov. 7.
“I wasn’t part of the conference committee. I really don’t know if it came from the Senate side, from the House side, if it was in conference where that particular language came from. But, the bottom line is, if we have backed up, and it appears we have backed up, we need to take a cold, hard look at it as we go forward in the next session,” Clemmons said.
South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster told News13 he supported the 1,000 foot rule in the Brady Bill, but “the message it sends is that we’re not as serious about it as we were when it had to go to circuit court and it had a penalty of 90 days,” McMaster said.
McMaster said lessening the penalty would hurt the progress law enforcement agencies have made in enforcing the state’s offender laws and would give offenders no incentive to follow them.
“The way to keep that from happening is to have a penalty that means something, that’ll put some fear into their hearts, that they’ll know that if they violate this law, they’re going to be punished and it’s going to be severe,” McMaster said.
“In this state we’ve taken, over the years, a very strong approach to this and we have no tolerance for these kinds of people,” McMaster said.
Clemmons said he plans to introduce new legislation that would increase the penalty for failing to register back to a 90 day mandatory sentence.
Clemmons also said he’s working with local victim’s advocates and sheriff’s offices to look for ways to tie up loopholes in the state’s sex offender laws that have allowed some offenders to go years without registering. ..News Source.. by Jody Barr
August 25, 2008
OH- Former police chief doesn’t have to register pending appeal
See earlier story:
8-25-2008 Ohio:
COLUMBUS - David L. Harrison does not have to register as a sex offender while he's out of prison.
The Ohio Supreme Court on Friday granted a motion by the former police chief to stop local prosecutors from imposing sex offender registration and relocation requirements while he's out of prison awaiting an appeal to the high court.
Harrison, police chief in Wapakoneta from 1988 to 2002, sought the emergency motion with the high court on Friday. Harrison sought the motion, through his attorneys Dean Boland and Brandie Swickrath, two days after the Auglaize County Sheriff's Office sent him a letter threatening to seek an indictment for failure to register if he did not schedule an appointment to register as a tier II sex offender.
"It's fairly unprecedented that the Supreme Court would release someone to begin with and then secondly that they would stay all proceedings against that person as they're out in the community," Boland said. "The Supreme Court usually doesn't take this active a role in these cases."
Harrison was released from Chillicothe Correctional Institution on Aug. 18. Harrison, 55, had been incarcerated for two years on a six-year sentence for child pornography-related charges. The Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals in its ruling granting the appeals bond did not specify that Harrison would be required to register, Boland noted in his argument seeking the stay.
Boland argued that Auglaize County Prosecutor Edwin Pierce was trying to force Harrison to register quickly in order to prevent Harrison from challenging the registration requirements. Pierce had set a deadline for this morning, Boland said in court records.
The Ohio Supreme Court in May agreed to hear Harrison's appeal of his conviction. On Friday, the court set oral arguments in the case for Nov. 19. Justice Robert Cupp, who previously served on the 3rd Ohio District Court of Appeals in Lima, recused himself from the case on Monday.
"If I was the state of Ohio I do think I would be interpreting this as the case is trending toward the Supreme Court looking favorably on our arguments," Boland said. "These are favorable rulings. He's encouraged by that. We like the way it's going, he's out with his family again."
Harrison was convicted in March 2006 in Madison County on 15 counts of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, two counts of unauthorized use of property and one count of theft in office.
Harrison appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court in February. The 12th Ohio District Court of Appeals in Middletown denied a similar appeal in December. The high court in May agreed to hear Harrison's case.
As part of the appeal, Harrison is seeking a reversal of his conviction citing double jeopardy violations. ..News Source.. by Bob Blake
August 24, 2008
OH- Former police chief fights order to register as sex offender
Apparently this man is appealing his conviction, and as part of that appeal has asked the court to enjoin the local police from enforcing sex offender registration. Or, it could also be he has filed a "Certified Question" with the Ohio Supreme court. Hard to tell with these skimpy facts.
8-24-2008 Ohio:
WAPAKONETA, Ohio (AP) -- A former Ohio police chief who was convicted of downloading photographs of nude children on his computer at work is fighting a requirement that he register as a sex offender now that he's out of prison.
David Harrison was police chief of Wapakoneta in northwest Ohio from 1988 to 2002. The 55-year-old served two years of a six-year sentence and was released Monday.
Harrison's attorney on Friday filed a motion with the Ohio Supreme Court to stop Auglaize County from ordering Harrison to register.
The county sheriff's office sent Harrison a letter on Wednesday threatening to seek an indictment if he did not schedule an appointment to register as a tier II sex offender.
Harrison's appeal of his conviction is scheduled to be heard by the state Supreme Court in May. ..News Source.. by WTTE FOX 28
August 6, 2008
OK- AG clarifies sex offender registration
8-6-2008 Oklahoma:
OKLAHOMA CITY — Out-of-state sex offenders whose crimes meet the requirements of the Oklahoma Sex Offender Registration Act must register if they live, work or attend school in Oklahoma, according to an opinion from Attorney General Drew Edmondson's office.
The state Department of Corrections sought the opinion after some sex offenders who had been convicted in other states questioned why they had to register as sex offenders in Oklahoma when they didn't have to in the state where their crime was committed.
"We're pleased with the opinion, and it supports what we've been doing," DOC spokesman Jim Rabon said Tuesday.
Rabon said the department takes elements from a state or federal crime that was committed in another state and compares them with elements of the Oklahoma statute that most closely matches.
The opinion states that regardless of whether the elements required to prove the out-of-state violations are explicitly repeated in the Oklahoma law, the person with an out-of-state conviction or deferred sentence is required to register as a sex offender in Oklahoma.
Oklahoma has about 5,850 registered sex offenders, Rabon said.
Anyone subject to the Oklahoma Sex Offender Registration Act must register with both the Department of Corrections and the local law enforcement authority having jurisdiction in the area where the person lives or intends to live. ..News Source.. by Oklahoma Attorney General
April 2, 2008
MO- Court: State can't require registry info from pre-1995 sex offenders
4-1-2008 Missouri:
KANSAS CITY — A Missouri appeals court says the state can't require people convicted of sex crimes before 1995 to provide information for the state sex offender registry.
But the court says the state can still list their names and criminal history if they come from public records.
The decision today mostly upholds a Jackson County judge's decision preventing the Highway Patrol from requiring all sex offenders to provide their current home and work addresses, pictures and other information for the Internet registry.
The judge said the state could not enforce the law against people convicted of sex crimes before it went into effect in 1995.
Patrol officials say the ruling likely won't change the registry, which now lists the exempt individuals in a separate section. ..more.. by The Missourian
Court of Appeals decision: Jane Doe I, et al., Respondents v. Thomas Phillips, et al., Defendant, James Keathley, Appellant.
September 29, 2007
Be They Fish or Not Fish: The Fishy Registration of Nonsexual Offenders
2007
Abstract:
The article deals with a bizarre but common phenomenon: the registration of nonsexual criminals in sex offender registries. The practice has been challenged in a number of cases, but there is much disagreement among courts - often within the same jurisdiction - on its constitutionality, and on the analysis it entails. The issue has recently picked-up steam - reaching some state Supreme Courts (Florida's and Illinois'), and appearing in the popular news media. The article offers a comprehensive analysis of the Substantive Due Process issues involved, showing why registering nonsexual criminal in sex offender registries is a violation of the federal Constitution (both on the part of the States and on the part of the federal government). It also shows that the registration of nonsexual criminals in sex offender registries is a first-rate case-study for negligent policy-making (supported by faulty data), which frequently received a stamp of approval from an often-poor judicial reasoning, itself supported by an impoverished constitutional jurisprudence. ..more.. by OFER RABAN, University of Detroit Mercy School of Law; University of Utah - S.J. Quinney College of Law zipzipzip
