11th Circuit reminds us of Statute of Limitations
Today the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the appeal of an out of state registrant who was kept on Florida’s public registry long after he moved out of the state. The appeal (and underlying Trial Court decision) were not based on the merits of an “out of state” challenge, but on a technicality. The registrant left the state in 2004 and did not bring his lawsuit until 2018, far beyond the 4-year statute of limitations in which he could bring a lawsuit.
The decision was not unexpected and not detrimental to anyone wanting to bring an out-of-state challenge, it was just a reminder that suits need to be timely brought.
The Court’s decision can be found here: McGroarty – Appllate Decision
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Maybe my timely election blurb will get more traction in this thread.
On the DUVAL ballot for 2020, the following judges of the 1st DCA are up for retainment:
Joseph Lewis, Jr.
Scott Makar
Rachel Norby
Tim Osterhaus
Clay Roberts
Adam S. Tanenbaum
Additionally, Carlos G. Muniz for Floriduh Suppeme Court
Given the current situation of our population, I would vote “NO” to retaining ALL of these “judges.”
And while I’m on my election soapbox, many counties in Florida have a half-cent sales tax on the ballot to pay for “dilapidated” public school buildings.
So what happened to the billions of dollars (legally earmarked for public schools) the state collected from our property taxes and The Floriduh Lottery?
I have seen dozens of commercials with shills supporting this tax, not one opposing it! Not any opposition on the internet that I can find either. Why is no one questioning how the money for public schools has been squandered for decades? These buildings didn’t deteriorate overnight. In the US, trillions have been thrown at public education over the past 50 years, yet we have the dumbest high school graduates of any industrialized nation.
So he needs to move back for a week then move out again or better move to Florida then move to a state that doesn’t keep you on registry for life then 3rd week move back home.
So does this imply that if someone wants to petition the Courts to be removed from the registry, has completed the 20 (or 25) year period, but for reasons is unable to get the funds together or find legal representation (for the petition), only has 4 years to submit that request to the Courts? This only adds to the confusion from my point of view.
The absurdity of the decision is revealed by the fact that he could just go back to Florida for 3 days, register here again, have his information updated and republished, then leave the state forever and be able to refile his case.
According to the 11th Circuit, he would then have another 4 years to file his claim, since the issue is when the state updates or publishes the information on the FDLE website. He lives in North Carolina. He could simply drive to Jacksonville, register in Duval County, spend 3 nights in the same hotel, then register his way out and boom, the 4-year statue of limitations refreshes. This demonstrates how silly the decision is, since its holding can be so easily circumvented.
The problem with this decision (in my opinion) and another brought by the same attorney in a similar situation, is that the underlying cases are strong. The decision has nothing to do with right or wrong or the merits of the case. it’s purely a technicality.
There is no justice, the better writer wins. Sad.
But still he has a point doesn’t he? Both the lower and Appeals court are clearly suggesting that had he asked within four years of leaving, he’d be removed. In fact in the McGoarty case the clearly say, “we don’t agree with the State’s claim that they have claim over the appellant who is living in another State” and further suggest that had he asked after 2012 he would have won. Why would they write that? Wouldn’t they be bound by the reasoning behind their own decisions or would they say, “oh, nevermind. The statute of limitations is really a non-issue – we were just kiddin. You’re on the registry for life in Florida no matter where you live or how long you wait after leaving the state to bring a case to be removed.”
Nothing in Florida law actually specifies that out-of-state offenders have to remain on the state’s registry. It’s a ridiculous FDLE policy that’s not based on statutory law.
This policy really doesn’t make sense from Florida’s standpoint, since he deincentivizes offenders from leaving Florida. It reduces the motivation from Florida offenders to move to another state that has shorter registrations periods and/or doesn’t publicly list all offenders. Since they’ll continue to be listed on Fl’s registry.
The whole point of lifetime registration in Florida is to inflate its registry to solicit larger SORNA grants to maintain it, shown by their registration of DEAD offenders even though their own policy is registration for LIFE.
I would think the comically-named SMART office would want to audit Florida’s registry for abuse (70k+ registrants, of whom over 40k are either dead, incarcerated, or out of state). That they don’t tells me that they don’t want to know how their funds are misspent to keep their own budget increasing.
I can’t think of a better example of government fraud, waste, and abuse than.
Stats of limit but according to Bertram vs us bank stats of limit don’t matter
Not positive it was us bank could bff e different one