WV- Complying with federal sex offenders act poses issues for state

7-20-2009 West Virginia:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- West Virginia officials are trying to determine if the state is in compliance with a federal act that would result in more stringent listings in the national sex offender registry - or whether it's really worth trying to comply.

West Virginia State Police Sgt. Michael Baylous said the federal act would affect numerous agencies in the state.

"At this time the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety has determined that in the interest of providing efficient governmental services it would be counterproductive to comply with the requirements of the Adam Walsh Act," Baylous said.

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 requires sex offenders to be grouped into three tiers for a national registry, House Judiciary attorney Stacy DeLong said.

Tier 1 includes a 15-year registration for a "catchall" of misdemeanors and felonies; Tier 2 includes a 25-year registration for sexual offense cases involving minors and child pornography; Tier 3 is a lifetime registration for cases involving force, threat, children under 12 and kidnapping, DeLong said.

"This is all retroactive," DeLong said.

This is a very interesting comment, retroactive, because if that is true and an offender is supposed to be classified based on the crime convicted of rather than any normal determiniation of risk to the community, THEN, the "term on the registry" ought to be calculated from the date of the crime. That makes sense, retroactive, however I doubt that will occur but could be grounds for a lawsuit... Lawmakers should not be allowed to have it only their way!

Sen. Evan Jenkins, D-Cabell, who has pushed for public access to registered sex offenders' Internet aliases, such as screen names, asked if the federal law requires this information in the registry as well.

The federal law would require screen names and pseudonyms, DeLong said, along with the sex offender's real name, Social Security, home and school address, license plate number, a description of the vehicle, nicknames, real and purported birth dates and passport number.

States that fail to comply could lose 10 percent of their U.S. Justice Department's Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program grants, she said. West Virginia's projected share for 2009 was about $2 million, DeLong said. So the state could be out $200,000 if it isn't in compliance.

Compliance will be difficult, said Delegate Bill Wooten, D-Raleigh, a chairman of the joint judiciary subcommittee studying the issue.

"In West Virginia, as in most states, juvenile records are sealed, so it presents almost an insurmountable enforcement problem," Wooton said. "Those records are sealed."

The federal government had initially required states to be in compliance this month for the act, which includes the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, or SORNA, DeLong told lawmakers.

However the state - and lawmakers - may have more time, as U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in May authorized a one-year extension of the deadline, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Wooton said he was not aware of the extension at the federal level.

"If it does not occur then we are not in compliance because the Legislature will lack the ability to change (the) law until next January," Wooton said.

The issue is similar to states following federal laws on seat belts and blood alcohol level or risk losing federal funds, said Senate Pensions Committee Chairman Dan Foster, D-Kanawha, a chairman of the judiciary subcommittee.

"It's not an uncommon way for the federal government to not mandate something but to make a financial incentive," Foster said.

Lawmakers will address the differences between state and federal law in future meetings and will as a subcommittee make recommendations on whether it is good public policy to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, Wooton said. Wooton's goal was to have a recommendation ready in December.

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- West Virginia officials are trying to determine if the state is in compliance with a federal act that would result in more stringent listings in the national sex offender registry - or whether it's really worth trying to comply.
West Virginia State Police Sgt. Michael Baylous said the federal act would affect numerous agencies in the state.

"At this time the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety has determined that in the interest of providing efficient governmental services it would be counterproductive to comply with the requirements of the Adam Walsh Act," Baylous said.

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 requires sex offenders to be grouped into three tiers for a national registry, House Judiciary attorney Stacy DeLong said.

Tier 1 includes a 15-year registration for a "catchall" of misdemeanors and felonies; Tier 2 includes a 25-year registration for sexual offense cases involving minors and child pornography; Tier 3 is a lifetime registration for cases involving force, threat, children under 12 and kidnapping, DeLong said.

"This is all retroactive," DeLong said.

Sen. Evan Jenkins, D-Cabell, who has pushed for public access to registered sex offenders' Internet aliases, such as screen names, asked if the federal law requires this information in the registry as well.

The federal law would require screen names and pseudonyms, DeLong said, along with the sex offender's real name, Social Security, home and school address, license plate number, a description of the vehicle, nicknames, real and purported birth dates and passport number.

States that fail to comply could lose 10 percent of their U.S. Justice Department's Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program grants, she said. West Virginia's projected share for 2009 was about $2 million, DeLong said. So the state could be out $200,000 if it isn't in compliance.

Compliance will be difficult, said Delegate Bill Wooten, D-Raleigh, a chairman of the joint judiciary subcommittee studying the issue.

"In West Virginia, as in most states, juvenile records are sealed, so it presents almost an insurmountable enforcement problem," Wooton said. "Those records are sealed."

The federal government had initially required states to be in compliance this month for the act, which includes the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, or SORNA, DeLong told lawmakers.

However the state - and lawmakers - may have more time, as U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in May authorized a one-year extension of the deadline, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Wooton said he was not aware of the extension at the federal level.

"If it does not occur then we are not in compliance because the Legislature will lack the ability to change (the) law until next January," Wooton said.

The issue is similar to states following federal laws on seat belts and blood alcohol level or risk losing federal funds, said Senate Pensions Committee Chairman Dan Foster, D-Kanawha, a chairman of the judiciary subcommittee.

"It's not an uncommon way for the federal government to not mandate something but to make a financial incentive," Foster said.

Lawmakers will address the differences between state and federal law in future meetings and will as a subcommittee make recommendations on whether it is good public policy to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, Wooton said. Wooton's goal was to have a recommendation ready in December.

Legislators also planned to look at practical problems stemming from current law, based on comments by Putnam County Circuit Court Judge O.C. Spaulding.

Spaulding told lawmakers that current state laws have unintended consequences and legislators should consider fine-tuning the system so more concentration is placed on targeting pedophiles as opposed to just cases involving minors.

The judge mentioned a litigant who, as a 32-year-old married father and active church member, was retroactively ordered to register as a sex offender for a consensual sexual act that occurred when he was 18. At the time, he had been "making out" with a 14-year-old girl and was caught by her father and charged with a crime, Spaulding said.

After the man registered as a sex offender, no one would allow their children to come over to his house and his children were shunned, Spaulding said.

"He was 18, she was 14. He touched her breasts through clothing; that is a crime," Spaulding said after last week's legislative meeting. "He suffered the punishment, but he shouldn't really be on the registration list for his entire life because of it."

"I want to see them focus more on pedophiles as opposed to the broad term of the victim being a minor," Spaulding said later. "There's a clear distinction between the sexual knowledge of a 16-year-old and an 8-year-old. "

Spaulding also gave several examples of situations where sex offenders registered themselves but failed to meet the technicalities of making changes to the registration:


A registered sex offender who lived in Kanawha County and worked in Putnam County registered with both counties. When he changed jobs to Kanawha County, he reported it to that county but not Putnam County and was indicted on a felony charge of failure to make a registration change.


A registered sex offender's job required him to travel to different sites in Kanawha and Putnam counties, and so under current laws he must go to the police detachment in that county each day before going to work to tell them where he will be that day. He failed to report one day and was charged.


A registered sex offender's wife took out a loan and bought a new car for herself but both names were on the title. He was indicted for not registering her vehicle.

"I'd like to see the Legislature clarify place of employment," Spaulding said. "Does that mean where you physically are every day or does that mean the address of your employer that you work for? Or does that mean where you regularly go and then get assigned out? We need to define that."

Sen. Frank Deem, R-Wood, asked Spaulding if judges could interpret the law as they would like it to be written.

"Judges have awesome power," Deem said.

"I took an oath to follow the law," Spaulding replied. "If you don't change it, I'm going to apply it."

"I'm charged with administering justice," Spaulding added later. "I'm glad we have the law, but as times go on we have to be willing to refine it to make it apply to the people it should apply to. We shouldn't get hung up on technical violations."

Contact writer Michelle Saxton at michelle.sax...@dailymail.com or 304-348-4843.

Legislators also planned to look at practical problems stemming from current law, based on comments by Putnam County Circuit Court Judge O.C. Spaulding.

Spaulding told lawmakers that current state laws have unintended consequences and legislators should consider fine-tuning the system so more concentration is placed on targeting pedophiles as opposed to just cases involving minors.

The judge mentioned a litigant who, as a 32-year-old married father and active church member, was retroactively ordered to register as a sex offender for a consensual sexual act that occurred when he was 18. At the time, he had been "making out" with a 14-year-old girl and was caught by her father and charged with a crime, Spaulding said.

After the man registered as a sex offender, no one would allow their children to come over to his house and his children were shunned, Spaulding said.

"He was 18, she was 14. He touched her breasts through clothing; that is a crime," Spaulding said after last week's legislative meeting. "He suffered the punishment, but he shouldn't really be on the registration list for his entire life because of it."

"I want to see them focus more on pedophiles as opposed to the broad term of the victim being a minor," Spaulding said later. "There's a clear distinction between the sexual knowledge of a 16-year-old and an 8-year-old. "

Spaulding also gave several examples of situations where sex offenders registered themselves but failed to meet the technicalities of making changes to the registration:

A registered sex offender who lived in Kanawha County and worked in Putnam County registered with both counties. When he changed jobs to Kanawha County, he reported it to that county but not Putnam County and was indicted on a felony charge of failure to make a registration change.

A registered sex offender's job required him to travel to different sites in Kanawha and Putnam counties, and so under current laws he must go to the police detachment in that county each day before going to work to tell them where he will be that day. He failed to report one day and was charged.

A registered sex offender's wife took out a loan and bought a new car for herself but both names were on the title. He was indicted for not registering her vehicle.

"I'd like to see the Legislature clarify place of employment," Spaulding said. "Does that mean where you physically are every day or does that mean the address of your employer that you work for? Or does that mean where you regularly go and then get assigned out? We need to define that."

Sen. Frank Deem, R-Wood, asked Spaulding if judges could interpret the law as they would like it to be written.

"Judges have awesome power," Deem said.

"I took an oath to follow the law," Spaulding replied. "If you don't change it, I'm going to apply it."

"I'm charged with administering justice," Spaulding added later. "I'm glad we have the law, but as times go on we have to be willing to refine it to make it apply to the people it should apply to. We shouldn't get hung up on technical violations." ..Source.. by Michelle Saxton, Daily Mail Capitol Reporter

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

CT- Legislation will toughen and expand reporting requirements of sex offenders

Adam Walsh Act & Connecticut: And so registration goes full circle, Connecticut & US Sup ct, from constitutional to unconstitutional. My prediction.

3-30-2009 Connecticut:

Changes to Sex Offender Registry Include More Frequent Reporting, New ID Requirements

Governor M. Jodi Rell today announced that her office has submitted testimony to the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee in support of her bill to improve Connecticut’s sex offender registry and to expand the reporting requirements of sex offenders, including the frequency of reporting and the types of information reported.

HB 6384, An Act Concerning the Registration of Sexual Offenders, which makes the state’s sex offender registry conform to the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection Act, provides greater public protection by making significant improvements to the sex offender registry and by placing the toughest notification requirement in the country on registered sex offenders entering the state. Out-of-state registrants would be required to provide prior written notice to Connecticut authorities 48 hours before entering the state.

“Public safety is the most important responsibility of government and we must be especially vigilant on behalf of our youngest and most vulnerable citizens,” Governor Rell said. “These changes will increase the frequency of reporting and expand the amount of information available on sex offenders to include their employers and information about vehicles that offenders drive.

“The more the public knows, the better protected they will be,” the Governor said. “With these changes, the information available about registered sex offenders in Connecticut will be comprehensive and the host of new reporting requirements we are imposing on them will help law enforcement officials keep close tabs on their activities.”

The bill also includes revisions to the registry that will make the sex offender registry a three-tiered, “offense-based” system with new requirements and additional information about offenders. The three tiers are based on the seriousness of the offense, with Tier 1 offenses requiring 15-year registration, Tier 2 offenses requiring 25-year registration and Tier 3 offenses requiring lifetime registration.

Under the restructured system, registrants will be required to report in person to law enforcement registry personnel between one and four times per year, depending on their tier designation. In addition, they face additional reporting requirements including the name and address of their employer, the license plate number and description of their vehicle, the name of their probation or parole officer and their telephone or cell phone numbers.

They will be required to have a Connecticut driver’s license or non-driver identification card. They will also have to provide copies of their birth certificate, travel and immigration documents and any professional licenses.

Under this bill, registration will also apply to individuals who had previously eluded registration as a result of a release into the community that predated statutory requirements. Such individuals that have been convicted or found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect of a sex offense and reenter the criminal justice system for any crime would be required to register.

The law expands the list of educational institutions that if registrants worked in or attended, such registrants must report to the registry. The expansion captures many of those locations where children are found outside of school.

..News Source.. by Governor Rell's Office

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Registering Harm: How Sex Offense Registries Fail Youth Communities

11-22-2008 National:

Registering Harm is a new report exploring the negative impact that state compliance with the Adam Walsh Act will have on youth, communities, and states.

Congress passed the Adam Walsh Act, a federal law that requires states to include children as young as age 14 on registries — often for the rest of their lives — in an attempt to protect our children from sexual violence. But the Adam Walsh Act won’t keep ourchildren safe.

Instead, this law will consume valuable law enforcement resources, needlessly target children and families, and undermine the very purpose of the juvenile justice system. Thankfully, states can opt out of compliance with this law, and make smart investments in programs and policies that will actually protect our children and our communities.

INTRODUCTION:

Initially, registries were restricted to law enforcement use and were used largely to track adults who had been convicted of violent sex offenses. More recently, policymakers have expanded the scope of registries by including children on the registry, requiring registration for nonviolent offenses, and making registries available to the public in online databases. The Adam Walsh Act is a federal law that aims to further expand the breadth of registries at the state level and requires states to list all registrants on the national online database, the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Registry. This report documents the issues related to public safety and fiscal accountability that states should consider as they determine whether to comply with the Adam Walsh Act or otherwise expand the reach of their existing registries.

During the past two decades, sensationalized media accounts of crimes that have a sexualized component have driven policy aimed at preventing sexual violence. As a result, millions of dollars of state and federal resources support registries despite that fact that there is no evidence that public registries reduce sexual violence.

What we do know, however, is that these registries consume public safety resources and may be funded at the expense of alternative approaches that research suggests actually would reduce sexual violence in our communities.

Research shows that laws that place people convicted of sex offenses on registries or that mandate other restrictions are counterproductive and may even make the problem of sexual violence worse. These laws do not deter inappropriate behavior; instead, registries can actually create more crime by alienating those on the registry from social support systems, including education, employment, and housing, that have been shown to reduce the likelihood that an individual might participate in illegal activities.

The Adam Walsh Act (AWA)* mandates the registration of children for certain sex offenses and, through coordinated state effort, the appearance of those records on the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Registry, which is maintained by the FBI. The AWA requires registration for youth as young as age 14 despite the fact that research shows that children are very amenable to rehabilitation and that the consequences of registration are likely to undermine any rehabilitative programming available for children. In some cases, these young people will be on a public registry for the rest of their lives, which can have numerous and permanent negative effects on their lives and those of their families, including alienation from social networks, schools, and churches. The AWA purports to protect children, yet subjecting youth to these consequences fails to provide any public safety benefit and instead significantly harms youth who are forced to register.

Victims’ rights groups, organizations founded in the name of children harmed by sexual violence, treatment professionals, criminal justice reformers, and researchers have noted that sex offense registries can generate a false sense of security for people in communities and do not provide adequate information on how to protect their families from sexual offenses.

Registries have questionable — and sometimes negative — public safety outcomes for several reasons, including law enforcement’s inability to accurately track and maintain all the information required by the registries in a timely manner. Additionally, most registries indiscriminately sweep up people who pose no threat to public safety. The over-inclusiveness of a registry actually diminishes its value as a public safety tool because it becomes impossible to determine who might pose a real threat.

Furthermore, establishing and maintaining registries consumes law enforcement time and money. States can expect to spend millions of dollars fully implementing and sustaining the guidelines of the AWA, without significant federal financial assistance. Law enforcement officers who previously protected our communities
are now tracking down people who fail to register, many of whom are not a threat to public safety. This gives police little time to focus on monitoring the select individuals who may be a high risk to the community. Simply put, registries divert resources from positive and effective public safety strategies that have been proven
to prevent sexual violence and lower violence in communities.

However, even with enough law enforcement resources to make sure that people are registering accurately and often, there is a distinct lack of evidence that supports the notion that registries make us safer. In fact, the opposite may be true. Continued investments in registries put our families in danger with short-sighted
policies that alienate people who are trying to safely re-enter the community. We owe it to our children and to our communities to implement sound public safety strategies based on evidence, not media-created hype.

This report explores the potential impact that compliance with the Adam Walsh Act will have on states, communities, and youth, who are targeted by the new legislation. The report includes the following findings:

---Despite policymakers’ assertions that people who are convicted of sex offenses are likely to commit another sex offense, research from the Department of Justice (DOJ) indicates otherwise. The DOJ determined that individuals previously convicted of sexual offenses had a lower overall rearrest rate for any new offenses (not necessarily sexual offenses) than did people convicted of other offenses, 43 percent to 67.5 percent respectively.1

---Responses to children who commit sex offenses should recognize the difference between children and adults, including the fact that children are more amenable to rehabilitation. Registries ignore this fact and impose adult criminal sanctions on children and therefore undermine the rehabilitative process.

---According to the National Center on Sexual Behavior of Youth, the vast majority of youth sex offenses are manifestations of non-sexual feelings. Most youth behavior that is categorized as a sex crime is activity that mental health professionals do not deem as predatory.2 Many of the behaviors reported are status offenses, including things such as parking and necking, which would not be a crime if committed by an adult.3

---Lawmakers established sex offense registries with the aim of protecting children from strangers. However, research conducted with the Federal Bureau of Investigation has found that 34 percent of youth victims (0-17 years old) were sexually assaulted by a family member and 59 percent were assaulted by acquaintances. In other words, 7 percent of youth victims in this study were assaulted by strangers.4

---The cost to states of coming into compliance with the Adam Walsh Act could potentially reach millions of dollars. Virginia estimated that the cost of compliance with the Adam Walsh Act would exceed $12 million.5

---Being on a registry can hinder a child’s ability to access rehabilitative services needed to lead a productive life. Registries can impede access to employment, housing, and education. Barriers to these basic services can inhibit a young person from turning his or her life around, and may actually encourage delinquent behavior.6

---Placement on a registry can be extremely detrimental to a young person’s development, making it difficult to progress through school and to participate in appropriate adolescent activities. Youth who are labeled “sex offenders” often experience rejection from peer groups and adults and are therefore more likely to associate with delinquent or troubled peers and are less likely to be attached to social institutions such as schools and churches. 7 Youth who are detached from normative social institutions may be more likely to engage in illegal behaviors.

---Registries can lead to a false sense of security for families and communities as they are increasingly overloaded with people convicted of offenses that pose little or no danger to public safety. For example, public urination is a registry-eligible offense and in 29 states consensual sex between teenagers is also cause for registration.8

To read the remainder of the report by The Justice Policy Institute

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

The Florida Senate on "FISCAL, POLICY, AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING STATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE ADAM WALSH ACT"

11-6-2008 Florida:

Statement of the Issue
Florida is approaching a crossroad regarding its laws on sex offender registration and notification. Legislators will need to determine whether Florida should substantially implement the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), which is Title I of the Adam Walsh Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (AWA),1 or not substantially implement SORNA, which would result in Florida incurring a 10 percent reduction in Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) funding (the penalty Congress has provided for non-compliance with SORNA requirements).

Discussion
This brief focuses on fiscal, policy, and legal considerations that may be relevant to legislators in determining whether to substantially implement SORNA. To the extent information is available, the potential fiscal impact of substantially implementing SORNA will be compared to the impact of non-compliance. This brief will also focus on three SORNA requirements that Florida has not adopted and that appear most likely to generate discussion and debate: the registration of employment information and public listing of the address of the employer of a registered sex offender; the registration of school information and public listing of the address of a secondary school of a registered juvenile sex offender; and the retroactive application of SORNA requirements.2


Background
The AWA, of which SORNA is a part, is the latest in a long line of federal legislation affecting states. registration/notification laws, and attempts to make all of these states. laws uniform with respect to requirements (or “minimum” standards) that Congress has judged to be necessary to be included in states. laws. It appears that the AWA has generated significant debate and controversy. Illustrative of this controversy, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) has described the AWA as an “unfunded mandate,” a “one-size-fits-all approach to classifying, registering and, in some circumstances, sentencing sex offenders,” and legislation that was “crafted without state input or consideration of state practices.”3

For the remainder of the publication: by The Florida Senate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

From the Justice Policy Institute on the Adam Walsh Act

9-10-2008 National:

Three brilliant pieces of public policy work produced by the Justice Policy Institute.

Fact Sheets Examine Impact of Sex Offender Registries
Factsheet: Youth Who Commit Sex Offenses

Factsheet: The Negative Impact of Registries on Youth

Factsheet: What Will It Cost States to Comply with the Sex Offender Registry and Notification Act?

Note: The third Factsheet concludes "Given the enormous fiscal costs of implementing SORNA, coupled with the lack of evidence that registries and notification make communities safer, states should think carefully before committing to comply with SORNA." ..Source.. Justice Policy Institute

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Democrat Senate Passed 94% of Bills without Debate or Roll Call Vote

Example of major legislation passed without debate: The Adam Walsh Act of 2006

7-28-2008 National:

Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) dismissed Democratic claims of obstructionism and expressed outrage last week over a government report that shows the majority of bills that have passed in the Democrat-controlled Senate of the 110th Congress have done so without any debate or even a vote.

“The U.S. Senate has a nine percent approval rating, because the American people believe that much of our work is done in secret with no debate, no transparency and no accountability,” Coburn told reporters at press conference Wednesday at the Capitol.

“This report shows that the reality is worse than the public’s fears. Instead of encouraging open debate, I’m disappointed that Majority Leader Reid often chooses secrecy or demagoguery,” he added.

Coburn was referring to a non-partisan study released on June 10 by the government’s Congressional Research Service (CRS), which indicates that 855 of the 911 bills passed by the Senate of the 110th Congress have been streamlined by Democratic Party leadership with a procedural tactic known as Unanimous Consent (UC), which requires no debate or even a vote.

With the Senate’s traditional August recess about to start, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has repeatedly accused Republicans, however, and especially Coburn and DeMint, of blocking UC on legislation that he says is critical to the well-being of many Americans.

Coburn and DeMint have a reputation for reading and objecting to bills that would have otherwise passed without debate or objection, Bryan Darling, director of Senate relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation, told CNSNews.com.

Reid has also objected to a procedural tactic know as filibuster, which Republicans have used to block legislation they oppose.

“I had out here earlier today our Velcro chart, 79 [Republican] filibusters,” said Reid on June 25. “Is it any wonder that the House seats that came up during the off-year went Democratic? Is it any wonder that the State of Mississippi sent us a Democratic House Member? ... It is no wonder because they see what is going on over here.”

Reid was referring to a flip chart that the Democrats use to tally the number of GOP filibusters. As of Friday, July 25, there were 85 Republican filibusters, according to Reid’s press office.

On Thursday, Reid introduced the Advance America's Priorities Act, which is nicknamed the “Coburn Omnibus” because it patches together 40 bills, many of which Coburn has already stopped from passing through the Senate by Unanimous Consent.

Reid’s press secretary, Jim Manley, told The Hill on June 27 that the omnibus is a reaction to Coburn’s obstruction.

"Look what happened last time we did this: Sen. Coburn held up action on dozens of bills for narrow, personal reasons, demanding debate and four amendments,” said Manley.

“These bills were held up for months. The Senate had to waste precious time to allow him to offer a few amendments. That is not debate and amendment. It is abuse, obstruction and delay," he said.

"Things have gotten so bad that Republican senators have approached Reid to ask that their bills be included in the package," Manley added.

But Coburn said on Wednesday that forcing costly bills before Congress right before a recess is typical of the Democratic leadership’s approach to legislating.

“They [Democrats] have tried to ram them [bills] through right before recess to pressure us to give up,” said Coburn. “But senators shouldn’t fear debate on these important bills.

“It’s in the best traditions of our republic to demand the Senate actually do its job and have a public debate on bills that expand government and increase the burden on taxpayers. Senator Reid can complain all he wants, but Republicans represent millions of Americans whose voices are being silenced by Democrat strong-arm tactics,” he added. ..News Source.. by Josiah Ryan, Staff Writer

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

The Adam Walsh Act: The Scarlet Letter of the Twenty-First Century

2008

Reforming sex offender laws will not be easy. At a time when national polls indicate that Americans fear sex offenders more than terrorists, legislators will have to show they have the intelligence and courage to create a society that is safe yet still protects the human rights of everyone.1

I. INTRODUCTION
Police arrested Evan B.,2 a high school student in Salina, Oklahoma, for exposing himself to several female students on his way to the restroom.3 Although Evan’s mother told the local media her son’s behavior was just a “high school thing,” a court charged Evan with indecent exposure, and Evan served four months in prison before receiving a five-year suspended sentence and community service.4 Additionally, his “high school thing” required him to register as a sex offender in Oklahoma.5

Unfortunately, the stigma of being a registered sex offender propelled Evan’s life into a downward spiral, driving him out of his community and away from his family.6 After dropping out of school and moving to Tulsa, Evan struggled to find and maintain employment.7 Less than a year later, Evan committed suicide.8 He shot himself only one month shy of his twentieth birthday.9

According to his mother, it seemed like Evan stopped caring about school and his future after the incident and his sentencing.10 To her, Evan was a normal kid, but registering as a sex offender turned his life upside down.11 She believed that “some considerations should be given to sex offender registration requirements when the charge stems from a nonviolent act.”12

In recent years, the words “sex offender” have transformed into a loosely and frequently used term.13 Congress and state legislatures have enacted sex offender laws because of highly publicized, horrific crimes, particularly those committed against children.14 As federal and state governments introduce stricter punishments, requirements, and prohibitions for sex offenders, the offenders become branded by the negative stigma associated with their status.15 While many sex offenders commit heinous crimes, experts and officials question whether the strict laws imposed against all sex offenders, including non-violent offenders like Evan B., actually increase the safety of those the laws seek to protect.16

This Note will argue that the most recent development in this area of law, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (AWA), contains over-inclusive sex offender registration requirements and punishments. Implementation of the AWA will undoubtedly cause problems for state governments, law enforcement, non-violent sex offenders, and citizens, both as taxpayers and intended beneficiaries of the AWA. Specifically, the AWA is an unfunded mandate that places severe and unfair registration requirements and punishments on sex offenders, and requires offenders to register without distinguishing between violent and non-violent offenders or evaluating the likelihood of recidivism.

Part II of this Note examines the development of sex offender registration requirements in the federal and state governments. It addresses the transformation from the initial freedom left with the states to determine their own standards to the recent, more expansive, and mandatory federal requirements under the AWA. Part III of this Note discusses the purpose of the sex offender requirements under the AWA and reasons why the AWA’s over-inclusiveness hinders achievement of that purpose. Part IV concludes with a call for reform of the AWA, in order to better achieve the AWA’s purpose.

..The rest of the paper.. by Lara Geer Farley, B.A. 2005, Wichita State University; J.D. Candidate 2008, Washburn University School of Law. I thank Professor and Capital Appellate Defender Rebecca Woodman for her vast knowledge and insightful advice regarding the direction and information of this note. I thank the Washburn Law Journal Editorial Board, especially Brooke Hesler, Laurel Klein Searles, and Tim Hurley, for their endless patience, efforts, and assistance throughout the entire writing process. I thank my family for the opportunities and experiences they have given me, and I am especially grateful to my grandparents for their love and guidance throughout my life.

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

MO- Sex offenders left off list may be added

See my commentary following the news article which discusses both the Missouri Constitutional changes, and the effect on previously convicted sex offenders, AND, article comments about what other states are proposing; very important. The Adam Walsh Act is deeply involved in this ex post facto violation.

Bill seeks to overturn court's decision on retroactive registration.

5-13-2008 Missouri:

Their crimes predated laws that track their movements and broadcast their names, faces and offenses to the world.

But Missouri sex offenders with decades-old records might soon be told to stand and be counted, a practice that's already common in other states and seems to be gaining momentum as state legislatures seek to comply with federal law.

Last week, the Missouri House Rules Committee approved a Senate Joint Resolution that would require almost all sex offenders (See Senate Bill 714 for details) to register, regardless of conviction date.

The resolution seeks to upend a 2006 Missouri Supreme Court opinion that ruled retroactive registration --then common in the state -- illegal under the Missouri constitution. The decision led to the removal of more than 4,300 names from the Missouri sex offender registry.

The House might vote on the resolution as early as today. If passed, it could appear on state ballots in November.

"We're giving the citizens of Missouri an option," said Republican state Sen. Jason Crowell, a sponsor. "If we're going to have a list, everybody should be on the list.

"Sexual predators are sexual predators. Period."

--Immediately this contradicts the tiered classification system of the Adam Walsh Act, not everyone is a sexual predator. In fact, the term "predator" (predatory) is already defined in federal law, obviously Sen. Crowell is oblivious of federal law:

Title 42 Sec. 14071a(3)(E) The term “predatory” means an act directed at a stranger, or a person with whom a relationship has been established or promoted for the primary purpose of victimization.

Clearly not everyone is predatory especially the juvenile on juvenile cases, or the Romeo and Juliet type cases. This Senator 's proposal shows he needs to do more research and reading of the laws.

Other states
Missouri is far from alone in considering the issue.

Last year, Tennessee toughened its sex offender registry laws to apply to anyone in the state who has ever been convicted of certain sex crimes. Prior to the change, only those who committed crimes after Jan. 1, 1995 -- when the state's registry law took effect -- were required to sign up.

Michigan lawmakers are mulling over a bill that would force adults convicted of criminal sexual conduct with a child to register, regardless of conviction date. Michigan enacted its registry law -- known as a Megan's Law in most states -- in October 1995, and has typically only required those convicted after that date to register.

Offenders who were in jail, on parole or on probation for their sex crimes when the law was passed also have been told to register in Michigan.

The new proposal is aimed at tracking the state's most potentially dangerous offenders, said David Law, the Republican representative who drafted the Michigan legislation.

"My concern was that I wanted to make sure we get to the worst of the worst," said Law, a former prosecutor. "Putting them on the sex offender registry is the least we can do."

The U.S. Constitution specifically bars states from passing ex post facto laws --those that punish someone for activity committed before the law was enacted. But retroactive enforcement of Megan's Laws is not a new concept.

Iowa, New York, New Jersey and a host of other states require offenders to sign up if they were on parole or probation for a sex crime when the registries took effect.

Alaska orders anyone in the state who's been convicted of a sex offense to register --a law deemed constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003. The court found Alaska's law was a civil, regulatory measure, not a punitive one.

Tracking sex offenders
States are increasingly taking a fresh look at their registry laws.

That's partially due to the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, signed into law by President Bush in 2006.

The law is designed in part to make it easier to track sex offenders moving from state to state.

To that end, it requires states to establish a uniform tier system for offenders, under which they are required to register for 15 years, 25 years or life based on their offenses.

The act also mandates the type of information sex offenders must provide when registering.

Such provisions have come under fire by the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, which say they go too far in regulating the lives of offenders.

"It's a fiction to say that this is a civil matter when this is, in fact, an extension of the criminal punishment," said Mike Kopie, a Chicago defense attorney and co-chair of NACDL's Sex Offender Policy Task Force. "There has to be a balance between protecting the community and the rights of people to go on with their lives."

The increased strictures mandated by the Walsh Act may prompt new challenges to the retroactive application of Megan's laws, said Michael Iacopino, also a member of the NACDL's task force.

"They're requiring sex offenders to report more often, they're requiring sex offenders to report more information," he said. "It's becoming more like a probation and parole as opposed to a regulatory system."

States are expected to comply with the Walsh Act by July 2009. Failure to do so could result in the loss of federal grant money.

The National Conference of State Legislatures reported in March that 19 states have taken steps to comply with the act. Among them: Ohio, which has faced outcry over a provision that retroactively increased the period of time sex offenders in the state must register.

More than 3,000 offenders have filed suit to challenge the change, said Erin Rosen, an Ohio assistant attorney general.

Prior to the new law, the majority of Ohio's 27,000 sex offenders were required to register for 10 years, Rosen said. Now, most must register for life.

"The goal is to close loopholes when offenders move from state to state," Rosen said. "The only feasible way to do that is an offense-based classification system."

The sticky issue of ex post facto registration requirement is unlikely to go away anytime soon.

As more states begin to look at their sex offender registry laws in light of the Walsh Act, battles over retroactive enforcement could play out throughout the country, said Charles Onley, of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers.

"Up until last year, most legislation was pretty much stable," he said. "Now, it's a moving target." ..more.. by Dirk VanderHart • News-Leader

Commentary by eAdvocate:
Before we begin there are four (4) current sections of the Missouri constitution that are relevant, they are:

Section 3. Powers of the people over internal affairs, constitution and form of government.—That the people of this state have the inherent, sole and exclusive right to regulate the internal government and police thereof, and to alter and abolish their constitution and form of government whenever they may deem it necessary to their safety and happiness, provided such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. Source: Const. of 1875, Art. II, Sec. 2.

Section 4. Independence of Missouri—submission of certain amendments to Constitution of the United States.—That Missouri is a free and independent state, subject only to the Constitution of the United States; that all proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States qualifying or affecting the individual liberties of the people or which in any wise may impair the right of local self-government belonging to the people of this state, should be submitted to conventions of the people. Source: Const. of 1875, Art. II, Sec. 3.

Section 13. Ex post facto laws—impairment of contracts—irrevocable privileges.— That no ex post facto law, nor law impairing the obligation of contracts, or retrospective in its operation, or making any irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities, can be enacted. Source: Const. of 1875, Art. II, Sec. 15.

Section 41. Indirect enactment of local and special laws—repeal of local and special laws.—The general assembly shall not indirectly enact a special or local law by the partial repeal of a general law; but laws repealing local or special acts may be passed. Source: Const. of 1875, Art. IV, Sec. 53(33).


PROPOSED: New Section 13:
That no ex post facto law, nor law impairing the obligation of contracts, or retrospective in its operation, or making any irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities, can be enacted; however, a law may be retrospective in its operation with respect to requiring sexual offenders to register with law enforcement, restricting sexual offenders from residing within a certain distance of a school or child-care facility, as required by law, or requiring every individual who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to or is found guilty or convicted of a felony to have a biological sample collected for purposes of DNA analysis.

Notice that the portion of the proposed law that mentions DNA, applies to everyone convicted of a felony, not just sex offenders. That portion is not retrospective in operation which means just those who are newly convicted.

As to sex offenders the proposed change goes beyond just registering, it includes residency issues. This now becomes a "Special Law" one covering ONLY one type of offender, sex offenders, and all of them with no exception. Yes, the news article implies there are exceptions but I have not been able to find those exceptions.

Missouri constitution Sections 3 and 4 are quite clear that its laws cannot be repugnant to the U.S. Constitution and that Missouri is subject to the U.S Constitution. I have yet to see any such changes, as Missouri proposes, as a change to the U.S. Constitution. In fact, nowhere in federal law is there anything that says, a certain group of people may not reside geographicially here or there.

Yes, there are sections of federal law which prohibit LIFETIME registered sex offenders from residing in federally substidized housing buildings, but such is not a geographical limitation. Time and time again throughout history such laws have been shot down except in time of war. i.e., Japanese folks were required to live in camps during wartime, but that has been eliminated.

The Missouri legislature recognizes that what they want to do, make registration retroactive, would be a "special law" and Missouri's constitution, section 41, prohibits the legislature from enacting such a law, that is why they are submitting it to the people who can make changes to the constitution.

Assuming that the people do pass the proposed changes, such changes would clearly be vindictive (to sex offenders who have the second lowest recidivism rate of all offenders), and those offenders who are now protected by the original constitution would still have an issue which could be brought to the U.S. Supreme court as an ex post facto violation of the U.S. Constitution which Missouri must abide by.

What other states are doing:

The article mentions Michigan mulling over a new bill to accomplish similar ends. Michigan, although it has not yet enacted provisions of the Adam Walsh Act, is attempting to enforce something which is written in the Adam Walsh Act.

Michigan is requiring folks who originally registered in Michigan and have since moved elsewhere (including folks who moved from one county to another), to return to Michigan (or the original county they registered in) and register according to its laws (or its idiot ways and special hours for registering).

This Michigan requirement, although absurd, is expecting folks who have moved out of the country to return quarterly (or in some cases annually) to complete Michigan registration requirments. Anyone who fails to follow that requirement is demed to be out of compliance and subject to arrest whereever they are in the world.

As absurd as that is, and very likely will be shot down in a court of law when tested, it is actually written into the Adam Walsh Act:

SEC. 113. REGISTRY REQUIREMENTS FOR SEX OFFENDERS.
(a) In General- A sex offender shall register, and keep the registration current, in each jurisdiction where the offender resides, where the offender is an employee, and where the offender is a student. For initial registration purposes only, a sex offender shall also register in the jurisdiction in which convicted if such jurisdiction is different from the jurisdiction of residence.

All I can say to all lawyers is, get this bunk into court with a quickness!

Oh yes, why is Missouri pushing to do this? Well folks, its a matter of money or the denial of money, and the person who makes that decision is a federal agency administrative employee, the U.S. Attorney General, but I'll leave that story for another day it is a long one. Actually I believe Congress, which authorized this hammer, has designed a system to circumvent state laws and state constitutions, but another day.

eAdvocate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006

HR 4472

One Hundred Ninth Congress of the United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and six

An Act

To protect children from sexual exploitation and violent crime, to prevent child abuse and child pornography, to promote Internet safety, and to honor the memory of Adam Walsh and other child crime victims.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the `Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006'.

(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

Sec. 2. In recognition of John and Reve Walsh on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of Adam Walsh's abduction and murder.

TITLE I--SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION ACT

Sec. 101. Short title.

Sec. 102. Declaration of purpose.

Sec. 103. Establishment of program.

Subtitle A--Sex Offender Registration and Notification

Sec. 111. Relevant definitions, including Amie Zyla expansion of sex offender definition and expanded inclusion of child predators.

Sec. 112. Registry requirements for jurisdictions.

Sec. 113. Registry requirements for sex offenders.

Sec. 114. Information required in registration.

Sec. 115. Duration of registration requirement.

Sec. 116. Periodic in person verification.

Sec. 117. Duty to notify sex offenders of registration requirements and to register.

Sec. 118. Public access to sex offender information through the Internet.

Sec. 119. National Sex Offender Registry.

Sec. 120. Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website.

Sec. 121. Megan Nicole Kanka and Alexandra Nicole Zapp Community Notification Program.

Sec. 122. Actions to be taken when sex offender fails to comply.

Sec. 123. Development and availability of registry management and website software.

Sec. 124. Period for implementation by jurisdictions.

Sec. 125. Failure of jurisdiction to comply.

Sec. 126. Sex Offender Management Assistance (SOMA) Program.

Sec. 127. Election by Indian tribes.

Sec. 128. Registration of sex offenders entering the United States.

Sec. 129. Repeal of predecessor sex offender program.

Sec. 130. Limitation on liability for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Sec. 131. Immunity for good faith conduct.

Subtitle B--Improving Federal Criminal Law Enforcement To Ensure Sex Offender Compliance With Registration and Notification Requirements and Protection of Children From Violent Predators

Sec. 141. Amendments to title 18, United States Code, relating to sex offender registration.

Sec. 142. Federal assistance with respect to violations of registration requirements.

Sec. 143. Project Safe Childhood.

Sec. 144. Federal assistance in identification and location of sex offenders relocated as a result of a major disaster.

Sec. 145. Expansion of training and technology efforts.

Sec. 146. Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking.

Subtitle C--Access to Information and Resources Needed To Ensure That Children Are Not Attacked or Abused

Sec. 151. Access to national crime information databases.

Sec. 152. Requirement to complete background checks before approval of any foster or adoptive placement and to check national crime information databases and State child abuse registries; suspension and subsequent elimination of Opt-Out.

Sec. 153. Schools Safe Act.

Sec. 154. Missing child reporting requirements.

Sec. 155. DNA fingerprinting.

TITLE II--FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAW ENHANCEMENTS NEEDED TO PROTECT CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL ATTACKS AND OTHER VIOLENT CRIMES

Sec. 201. Prohibition on Internet sales of date rape drugs.

Sec. 202. Jetseta Gage assured punishment for violent crimes against children.

Sec. 203. Penalties for coercion and enticement by sex offenders.

Sec. 204. Penalties for conduct relating to child prostitution.

Sec. 205. Penalties for sexual abuse.

Sec. 206. Increased penalties for sexual offenses against children.

Sec. 207. Sexual abuse of wards.

Sec. 208. Mandatory penalties for sex-trafficking of children.

Sec. 209. Child abuse reporting.

Sec. 210. Sex offender submission to search as condition of release.

Sec. 211. No limitation for prosecution of felony sex offenses.

Sec. 212. Victims' rights associated with habeas corpus proceedings.

Sec. 213. Kidnapping jurisdiction.

Sec. 214. Marital communication and adverse spousal privilege.

Sec. 215. Abuse and neglect of Indian children.

Sec. 216. Improvements to the Bail Reform Act to address sex crimes and other matters.

TITLE III--CIVIL COMMITMENT OF DANGEROUS SEX OFFENDERS

Sec. 301. Jimmy Ryce State civil commitment programs for sexually dangerous persons.

Sec. 302. Jimmy Ryce civil commitment program.

TITLE IV--IMMIGRATION LAW REFORMS TO PREVENT SEX OFFENDERS FROM ABUSING CHILDREN

Sec. 401. Failure to register a deportable offense.

Sec. 402. Barring convicted sex offenders from having family-based petitions approved.

TITLE V--CHILD PORNOGRAPHY PREVENTION

Sec. 501. Findings.

Sec. 502. Other record keeping requirements.

Sec. 503. Record keeping requirements for simulated sexual conduct.

Sec. 504. Prevention of distribution of child pornography used as evidence in prosecutions.

Sec. 505. Authorizing civil and criminal asset forfeiture in child exploitation and obscenity cases.

Sec. 506. Prohibiting the production of obscenity as well as transportation, distribution, and sale.

Sec. 507. Guardians ad litem.

TITLE VI--GRANTS, STUDIES, AND PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN AND COMMUNITY SAFETY

Subtitle A--Mentoring Matches for Youth Act

Sec. 601. Short title.

Sec. 602. Findings.

Sec. 603. Grant program for expanding Big Brothers Big Sisters mentoring program.

Sec. 604. Biannual report.

Sec. 605. Authorization of appropriations.

Subtitle B--National Police Athletic League Youth Enrichment Act

Sec. 611. Short title.

Sec. 612. Findings.

Sec. 613. Purpose.

Sec. 614. Grants authorized.

Sec. 615. Use of funds.

Sec. 616. Authorization of appropriations.

Sec. 617. Name of League.

Subtitle C--Grants, Studies, and Other Provisions

Sec. 621. Pilot program for monitoring sexual offenders.

Sec. 622. Treatment and management of sex offenders in the Bureau of Prisons.

Sec. 623. Sex offender apprehension grants; juvenile sex offender treatment grants.

Sec. 624. Assistance for prosecution of cases cleared through use of DNA backlog clearance funds.

Sec. 625. Grants to combat sexual abuse of children.

Sec. 626. Crime prevention campaign grant.

Sec. 627. Grants for fingerprinting programs for children.

Sec. 628. Grants for Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network.

Sec. 629. Children's safety online awareness campaigns.

Sec. 630. Grants for online child safety programs.

Sec. 631. Jessica Lunsford Address Verification Grant Program.

Sec. 632. Fugitive safe surrender.

Sec. 633. National registry of substantiated cases of child abuse.

Sec. 634. Comprehensive examination of sex offender issues.

Sec. 635. Annual report on enforcement of registration requirements.

Sec. 636. Government Accountability Office studies on feasibility of using driver's license registration processes as additional registration requirements for sex offenders.

Sec. 637. Sex offender risk classification study.

Sec. 638. Study of the effectiveness of restricting the activities of sex offenders to reduce the occurrence of repeat offenses.

Sec. 639. The justice for Crime Victims Family Act.

TITLE VII--INTERNET SAFETY ACT

Sec. 701. Child exploitation enterprises.

Sec. 702. Increased penalties for registered sex offenders.

Sec. 703. Deception by embedded words or images.

Sec. 704. Additional prosecutors for offenses relating to the sexual exploitation of children.

Sec. 705. Additional computer-related resources.

Sec. 706. Additional ICAC Task Forces.

Sec. 707. Masha's Law.

..more.. Choose "Text of Legislation" Then choose "#5" Then "Printer Friendly Display"

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act: A Legal Analysis

April 6, 2007

Summary
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, (P.L. 109-248, H.R. 4472), emerged from Congress following the passage of separate bills in the House and Senate (H.R. 3132 and S. 1086 respectively). The act's provisions fall into four categories: a revised sex offender registration system, child and sex related amendments to federal criminal and procedure, child protective grant programs, and other initiatives designed to prevent and punish sex offenders and those who victimize children.

The sex offender registration provisions replace the Jacob Wetterling Act
provisions with a statutory scheme under which states are required to modify their registration systems in accordance with federal requirements at the risk of losing 10% of their Byrne program law enforcement assistance funds. The act seeks to close gaps in the prior system, provide more information on a wider range of offenders, and make the information more readily available to the public and law enforcement officials.

In the area of federal criminal law and procedure, the act enlarges the kidnaping statute, increases the number of federal capital offenses, enhances the mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment and other penalties that attend various federal sex offenses, establishes a civil commitment procedure for federal sex offenders, authorizes random searches as a condition for sex offender probation and supervised release, outlaws Internet date drug trafficking, permits the victims of state crimes to participate in related federal habeas corpus proceedings, and eliminates the statute of limitations for certain sex offenses and crimes committed against children.

The act revives the authorization of appropriations under the Police Athletic Youth Enrichment Act among its other grant provisions and requires the establishment of a national child abuse registry among its other child safety initiatives.

This report is available in an abridged version, without footnotes and most
citations to authority, as CRS Report RS22646, Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act: A Sketch, by Charles Doyle. ..more..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006

Congressional Action

July 27, 2006: Signed by President George W. Bush
July 25, 2006: House agreed to Senate amendments by voice vote
July 20, 2006: Passed Senate as amended by voice vote
March 8, 2006: Passed House by voice vote

Other Status

May 17, 2007: Proposed guidelines issued by the Office of Justice Programs.

February 28, 2007: Interim rule with request for comments (by April 30, 2007) issued. Addresses retroactivity. Precedes full guidelines and regulations to implement sex offender registration and notification provisions of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. Rule declares the sex offender requirements to be non-punitive, regulatory measures. Asserts that those are validly applied, and enforced by criminal sanctions, to sex offenders whose predicate offense occurred prior to creation of the requirements.

August 2006: Regulations are being prepared by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Provisions Affecting the States

The stated purpose of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 is to protect the public, in particular children, from violent sex offenders via a more comprehensive, nationalized system for registration of sex offenders.

The act states that the attorney general will issue guidelines and regulations in interpretation and implementation of the legislation.

The act calls for state conformity to various aspects of sex offender registration, including information that must be collected, duration of registration requirement for classifications of offenders, verification of registry information, access to and sharing of information, and penalties for failure to register as required. The act states that failure of a jurisdiction to comply with the federal requirements within three years of the implementation of the act will result in a10 percent reduction to Byrne law enforcement assistance grants.

A number of new grant programs are authorized to assist states in improving sex offender registration and related requirements of the act.

Requirements

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act requires that sex offender registration occur before an offender is released from imprisonment or within three days of a non-imprisonment sentence. Changes in registry information must be reported in that time period, as well.

Each sex offender is to provide the following registration information: Name; Social Security number; address or multiple addresses; employer and address; school (if a student) and address; license plate number and description of any vehicle owned or operated by the offender; and any other information required by the attorney general.

Each jurisdiction must include the following information for each offender in the registry: A physical description; the criminal offense; the criminal history of the offender, including dates of arrests and convictions and correctional or release status; a current photograph; fingerprints and palm prints; a DNA sample, a photocopy of a valid driver's license or ID card; and any other information required by the attorney general.

The law defines and requires a three-tier classification system for sex offenders, on which other requirements are based. The tier levels are established as:

Tier I are those other than a tier II or tier III.

Tier II are those other than Tier I with an offense punishable by imprisonment for more than one year and comparable to or more severe than the following federal offenses involving a minor: sex trafficking; coercion and enticement; transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity; abusive sexual contact. Also includes any offense involving use of a minor in a sexual performance, solicitation of a minor to practice prostitution, or production or distribution of child pornography.

Tier III are sex offenses punishable by imprisonment for more than one year and comparable to or more severe than the following federal offenses: sexual abuse or aggravated sexual abuse; abusive sexual contact against a minor less than 13 years old; offense involving kidnapping of a minor (parent or guardian excepted); or any offense that occurs after one has been designated a tier II sex offender.
The law makes further clarifications of a sex offense and offense against a minor.

Regarding juveniles, the act defines a conviction for purposes of registration and classification to include juvenile adjudications if the juvenile offender is at least 14 years of age at the time of the offense and the offense adjudicated is comparable to or more severe than the federal offense aggravated sexual abuse.

The law sets requirements on duration of the registration requirement, according to the classification system. Tier 1 sex offenders are required to register for 15 years; tier II for 25 years and tier III offenders must register for life. Registration periods may be reduced, also according to the tier system, for completing certain programs or having a clean record for specified periods of time.

Registered sex offenders are required to appear in person to verify their address and other registry information and for update of the required photo. Frequency of personal appearance is set according to the tier system. Tier 1 offenders must appear in person each year; tier II offenders every six months; and for tier III sex offenders in-person verification is required every three months.

States are required to have a criminal penalty that includes a maximum term of imprisonment greater than one year for failure of a sex offender to comply with requirements. Assistance by federal law enforcement agencies is available to assist jurisdictions in locating and apprehending sex offenders who abscond from the registration requirement.

The law requires that states make registry information available on the Internet, in readily accessible form and with certain mandatory exemptions. Each state's website must have search capabilities compatible to the National Sex Offender Public Registry. The attorney general is to develop software to enable jurisdictions to establish and operate uniform registries and Internet sites, and states will have one year to implement it after it becomes available. The act also requires prompt sharing of information on registered sex offenders among state, local and federal law enforcement agencies and other entities.

Grant Programs Authorized

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 authorizes a Sex Offender Management Assistance grant program to help states implement and comply with the law, with bonus payments for substantial implementation within two years of the Act. A Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART) Office is established in the Department of Justice to administer standards for sex offender registration, grant programs and assistance to states. Other grants to states or localities are authorized to assist with verification of sex offender addresses.

The law authorizes grants to states for establishing, enhancing or operating civil commitment programs for sexually dangerous people. It includes definition of a sexually dangerous person and provides that states must have such a program or a plan for establishment within two years of the enactment of this act to receive these grants.

Also authorized is a three-year grant program at $5 million each year, supporting active, real-time and continuous monitoring (GPS) of offenders. States and localities may apply FY 2007 through FY 2009, and will be required to report on effectiveness and cost effectiveness.

The act authorizes Sex Offender Apprehension Grants, also 2007 through 2009, to assist states and localities in enforcing sex offender registration requirements.

Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Grants are authorized, also 2007 through 2009, to assist state and local governments, public and private entities, in addressing treatment needs of juvenile sex offenders.

Grants to law enforcement agencies are authorized under the Bureau of Justice Assistance to help with investigation and enforcement of sexual crimes against children. This includes funds for personnel, computer hardware and software needed to investigate and enforce Internet-facilitated crimes against children. Grants also are authorized to law enforcement agencies for fingerprinting programs for children; and to government and nonprofit organizations for purposes of establishing and improving child Internet safety.


Section-by-Section Summary of the Act
Title I: Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act

Sec. 111. Definitions, including three-tier sex offender classifications.

Sec. 112. States must establish a statewide sex offender registry that conforms to federal standards. The attorney general will issue guidelines and regulations interpreting the federal law.

Sec. 113 (c). When a registered sex offender changes registry information, states are required to immediately provide information to all other jurisdictions in which the offender is required to register.

Sec. 113 (e). States must provide a criminal penalty that includes a maximum term of imprisonment greater than one year for failure of a sex offender to comply with registration requirements.

Sec. 114. Sets out all of the information states must acquire as part of registration, including a DNA sample and "any other information required by the attorney general."

Sec. 115. The duration of the sex offender registration requirement is established in accordance with the three-tier system set out in Sec. 111. Requires 15 years for tier I sex offender; 25 years for tier II; and life for a tier III sex offender.

Sec. 116. Offenders required to register must appear in person for address verification every three months, six months or one year, according to the three-tier classification, including taking updated photographs.

Sec. 117. State officials must notify offenders of the registry requirements prior to release from custody or immediately upon sentencing if not in custody, and ensure that the registration occurs.

Sec. 118. Sex offender registry information must be available via the Internet in single-query format. Each state’s Internet site must be compatible for search capabilities within the National Sex Offender Public Website, and participate in that website as decided by the attorney general. Includes items required and optional for disclosure exemption.

Sec. 119, 120. The attorney general will establish a National Sex Offender Registry and a Public Website.

Sec. 121. Immediate information sharing is required when a sex offender registers or updates registry information. Notice is to be provided to the attorney general for update of the national registry, and information is to be provided to appropriate law enforcement, school and housing agencies, all other jurisdictions in which a sex offender must be registered, and other specified agencies, entities and organizations.

Sec. 122. The attorney general and appropriate law enforcement agencies also must be notified of failure of a sex offender to comply with registry requirements.

Sec. 123. The Attorney General shall consult with states and other jurisdictions to develop computer software for the creation and operation of uniform sex offender registries and websites.

Sec. 124, 125. States have three years, or until July 2009, to implement the requirements for sex offender registries, and one year from the creation of the software named in Sec. 123. States that fail to comply will lose 10 percent of funds allocated for that fiscal year under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968.

Sec. 125 (b). States are not required to take action that would violate that state’s constitution, as determined by the state’s highest court. However, the state must act in good faith with the attorney general to reconcile differences between this law and the state’s constitution and the state must implement alternative procedures or accommodations to fulfill the purposes of this law. (Consultation with state governor, attorney general, legislature is not mentioned.)

Sec. 126. The attorney general will establish a Sex Offender Management Assistance grant program to offset costs to states in implementing provisions of this law, for fiscal years 2007, 2008, 2009. Authorizes appropriations but no amount specified.

Sec. 143. The Department of Justice will create a Project Safe Childhood program to integrate federal, state and local efforts to investigate and prosecute child exploitation cases, identify and rescue victims of child exploitation crimes, conduct local training, education and awareness. The Department of Justice also will conduct training of state and local law enforcement relating to computer-aided child exploitation crimes. Appropriates funds for various functions FY 2007 and as may be necessary for five succeeding fiscal years.

Sec. 144. The Department of Justice will help states locating sex offenders who might be relocated after a major disaster.

Sec. 145. The attorney general will expand training efforts for all levels of law enforcement to effectively respond to threats to children. Meetings and conferences will be convened to discuss problems of use of Internet technology to exploit children and to develop pro-active approaches. Authorized is $1 million is for FY 2007 for these programs.

Sec. 146. Creates an Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART Office) within the Department of Justice, to administer grant programs and provide technical assistance to states and other entities involved with sex offender registration and notification.

Sec. 153. States may request the Department of Justice to conduct fingerprint checks of national crime information databases as part of an individual’s background check by a child welfare agency or school.

Sec. 154. Prohibits state policy that would remove a missing person entry from a state law enforcement system or National Crime Information Center database based solely on the age of the person.

Sec. 202-216. Sets federal mandatory penalties for crimes against children, including sex trafficking in children. Extends statute of limitations for felony sex offenses.


Title II: Federal Criminal Law Enhancements Needed to Protect Children From Sexual Attacks and Other Violent Crimes
This title creates federal offenses for the sale of date rape drugs over the Internet, creates stricter federal penalties for people who commit federal crimes against minors such as engaging in conduct relating to child prostitution and sexual abuse or sex trafficking of children. No sections appear to affect state statutes.


Title III: Civil Commitment of Dangerous Sex Offenders
Sec. 301. The attorney general will issue grants to states to establish or enhance civil commitment programs. A state must establish a program, or submit a plan for the creation of one, to be eligible for a grant. (Does not mandate state provisions.)

Sec. 302. Creates “civil commitment of a sexually dangerous person,” procedures for persons in federal custody against whom criminal charges have been dismissed solely due to the mental condition of the person (at U.S. Code 4248.) The attorney general “shall make all reasonable efforts to cause a state to assume such responsibility” for the custody and treatment of such people. If the state will not assume responsibility, the attorney general must place the individual in a suitable facility until a finding that he is no longer sexually dangerous, at which time he may receive conditional discharge. If the director of a facility in which a person is placed under federal civil commitment certifies that a person is sexually dangerous for reasons not related to a mental condition, the attorney general will release that person to the state for purpose of state proceedings for civil commitment; or, absent the state assuming responsibility, will release the person.


Title IV: Immigration Law Reforms to Prevent Sex Offenders From Abusing Children
This title amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to designate failure to register as a sex offender as a deportable offense and prohibits aliens who have committed sex offenses against children from having family-based petitions for citizenship approved unless determined appropriate by the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. No sections appear to affect state statutes.


Title V: Child Pornography Prevention
Asserts interstate commerce aspects of the child pornography market, which relies substantially on mail and Internet. Establishes definitions, procedures and penalties under federal law. Includes provisions governing simulated sexual conduct. May preempt some state laws.


Title VI: Grants, Studies, and Programs for Children and Community Safety
Sec. 603 - 617. Authorizes mentoring grants under the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention specifically to Big Brothers Big Sisters of America and the National Police Athletic League at-risk youth program.

Sec. 621. Grants are authorized from the Department of Justice to states, localities and tribes to assist with programs to utilize active, real-time monitoring devices for supervision of sex offenders, including equipment and personnel costs. Sets out minimum standards for the monitoring, and the attorney general will report to Congress by 2010 on effectiveness of electronic monitoring of sex offenders. Funding is authorized at $5 million per year for FY 2007-2009.

Sec. 622. Addresses treatment and management of sex offenders in the federal Bureau of Prisons.

Sec. 623. Creates a new section of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, to authorize grants to states, localities and tribes to assist in the enforcement of sex offender registration requirements, and grants to assist in the treatment of juvenile sex offenders. For registration requirements, authorizes appropriations for FY 2007-2009, with no monetary amount specified. Authorizes $10 million per year for FY 2007-2009 for juvenile sex offender treatment grants.

Sec. 624. The attorney general may provide grants to train and employ personnel to assist in cases cleared through DNA backlog elimination. Authorizes appropriations 2007 through 2011, with no amount specified.

Sec. 625. The Bureau of Justice Assistance may provide grants to law enforcement jurisdictions with 50,000 or more residents to hire additional law enforcement or train current staff in combating sexual abuse of children, investigating the use of the Internet in the sexual abuse of children, and/or purchase computer equipment to investigate sexual abuse and facilitate the creation of sex offender registries. Jurisdictions with fewer than 50,000 residents may apply, based on need. The attorney general is to prioritize the awarding of the grants based on need. Authorization provided for FY 2007-2009, with no amount specified.

Sec. 627. The attorney general is to create a program authorizing grants to state, localities, and tribes for the purpose of creating voluntary finger-printing programs for children, hiring law enforcement to conduct these programs, and providing the necessary computer equipment for these programs. Limitations for the use of the children’s fingerprints are included, with criminal penalties for violating the restrictions. Beginning in FY 2007, $20 million total is authorized for a five-year period.

Sec. 628. Authorizes grants to Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, for victim assistance services, for FY 2007-2010.

Sec. 630. The attorney general will make grants to states, localities and nonprofit organizations to establish programs to educate children and parents on Internet safety. These grants are subject to the availability of appropriations, and no specific amount is named.

Sec. 631. The attorney general may award grants to state, localities and tribes for the purpose of periodically verifying the residence of all or some registered sex offenders in their jurisdiction. The attorney general is required to report to Congress on the effectiveness of this activity. Authorizes sums as necessary to carry out this section for FY 2007-2009.

Sec 632. Authorizes funds to United States Marshals Service for "fugitive safe surrender program."

Sec. 633. The secretary of Health and Human Services and the attorney general will create a national registry of substantiated cases of child abuse or neglect. States and/or localities are to provide the information to be listed in the registry via electronic means and containing specific information decided by the secretary. Allows that an existing state or local equivalent registery of child abuse cases will suffice for the national registry.

Sec. 636. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of using driver’s license registration processes within the states to improve compliance with sex offender registration requirements, assess systems capabilities in the states, and determine potential costs to states.


Title VII: Internet Safety Act
This title creates federal offenses and penalties for child exploitation via the Internet and for knowingly embedding words and digital images into web source code for the purpose of deceiving minors into accessing material constituting obscenity. It also instructs the attorney general to increase the number of computer forensic examiners to be dedicated to investigating crimes involving the sexual exploitation of children, and forms additional Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces. No sections appear to affect state statutes.

Full text of the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006

..more.. by Updated July 27, 2007 NCSL Law & Criminal Justice Committee Susan Parnas Frederick, 202-624-5400 Donna Lyons, 303-364-7700

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...