Opportunity to help in an important legal challenge
EDITED: I HAVE TO EDIT THIS POST BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE CAUSED SOME MISUNDERSTANDING. WE ARE LOOKING FOR STATEMENTS FROM PEOPLE IN FLORIDA WHO HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS. PLEASE LIMIT RESPONSES TO ONLY HOW SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS HAVE IMPACTED YOU IN FLORIDA.
There is an important case currently pending in the Middle District of Florida, Louis Clements v. Secretary, Department of Corrections. Mr. Clements filed a Habeas Corpus petition challenging his criminal conviction. The district court dismissed his petition, finding that he was not ‘in custody’ as is required of a habeas petitioner. Mr. Clements appealed the dismissal, arguing that Florida’s sex offender residency restrictions (SORRs) are so onerous and restrictive, that they constitute him being “in custody”. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals thought this argument was worth further development, and remanded the case back to the District Court. You can read more about the Clements appeal here.
A couple of weeks ago, the District Court reopened the case, and gave the parties until mid-November to brief on the matter further.
FAC has been in touch with Mr. Clement’s lead attorney and has offered to help support his case in any way possible. Arguably nobody in the world can offer the Court more insight into exactly how restraining of one’s liberty the patchwork of SORRs (including the State’s SORR, County SORRs and Municipal SORRs) are, than the very people who are subjected to them. That’s us!
We are in a very unique position to provide declarations to the Court in support of Mr. Clements’ argument and we are calling on all members to help support this important case. If you want to assist, please write to [email protected] and include a brief factual summary of how the Sex Offender Residency Restrictions have impacted you. If you have had to move from your hometown because of the lack of compliant housing, if you are (or have been) homeless, forced to move from your residence, prevented from living with family, submitted dozens of addresses for approval only to have them all denied, stuck in a residence you are grandfathered into because you can’t move, etc. We need these real-life examples.
Once we receive your submission, we will contact you to confirm information, reformat it into a formal declaration and return it to you for signature. Over the next couple weeks we want to collect several declarations to provide to the attorneys in Clements’ case, and we are working on a relatively tight timeframe.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@Linda,
Every time I hear about how a person like your son was put on this damn list, I get so angry. Especially when he committed no crime, I am so sorry. I can tell you without a doubt that Uriah is very much alive and he is in no pain. He is finally being loved by everyone he sees. Thanks for sharing his story.
I tried to submit a time that I would/ could have been arrested for working at an address that was too close to a Daycare facility. That I can’t spend the night there because I would be within 1000 ft of the day care facility that was closed at night.
I’m not a Florida resident but my issies with that state in recent years have been well known, so I feel that is still important enough to mention.
Derek >>>
100% it is. They all are.
My autistic son took pleas while not being represented and he was placed on the list at age 18. His life was a nightmare. He would be woken in the middle of the night and questioned as any of the list are. He could not live with family and was actually told to go live in the woods even though several family members could provide him a home. They were “too close” to schools churches pop up day cares “places where children gather” whatever that means. At age 39 he could not take the constant harassment from law enforcement and the public that look these people up and “notify” neighbors. Place posters and are vigilantes. He was the victim of a predictor who was after his social security check. Tracked down on internet like other victims. She had 5 people’s identity when she was finally arrested. My son took his life and left a note to his family apologizing to us for what we had endured loving him. His name was Uriah. He was adopted at age 2 and did not speak until age 4. He could not communicate well. He did not understand. He never touched anyone. His crime supposedly was a remark.
Linda, So sorry about your son. If you’d like to share his story, please write to legal@floridaactioncommittee, but only discuss how the residency restrictions impacted him (for the purpose of this declaration).
@Linda
My heart hurts really bad for you and your son. Hopefully he is in a better place now with the Lord.
Thank you for sharing your story and the things we go through on the registry, such as some taking their own lives. Let us know if there is anything we can do for you.
Linda I am so sorry. My heart goes out to you. Uriah will not be forgotten.
I hate my life on the registry and would rather be dead than to live like this.
Burt
Please don’t say that. If you have any family or loved ones, if something happened to you, they would be heart broken. Stay strong for those you love, care about and cherish. Don’t let the haters win. Prayers, hope and love your way.
Quick question. Is Probation considered being, “In Custody”? If so I think it would be great to draw Comparisions between probation and Sorna. Like the following
1. In Office requirements every month, twice a year, 4 times a year compared to 12 times per year while on Probation.
2. Home visits twice a year or more just like probation.
3. Reporting work info and other information
4. Reporting travel
All of the Sorna restrictions have their roots in traditional probation. Also violations of any or the requirements of Sorna and probation could lead to the same place, Jail, prison house arrest etc.
I should have been more specific. We are ONLY looking for submissions on the impact of SORRs. For purposes of these declaration, imagine SORRs are the only requirement/restriction.
Can you further refine by noting whether you want only from FLA submissions on this request given it is a FLA Fed case or nationwide is acceptable too? I can see the latter would open floodgates to receiving many with specific details which could be helpful in presenting the argument in question.
Only Florida submissions are relevant to this case.
Thank you. Hopefully you get a wide cross-section of issues many face nationally on the topic from those in FLA who suffer the same, e.g., how being “in custody” has impacts that were never publicly thought of initially at the outset of the registry in letting society dictate further punishment from it. Just because legislative intent did not start out with the impacts in mind, the impacts from it have grown well beyond what anyone could have thought of and need to be reigned in.
We are not looking for a wide cross section of issues. Forget the “in custody” thing. All we are looking for here are people in Florida impacted by SORRs. Nothing else.
If this person wins, does it help the rest of us? I have seen many decisions that ended up only being a win for the person who won their case. Even the ex post facto case if one would only be a win for those who filed the case and the rest of would have to hire our own attorneys and use that case as precedence. I verified that to get clarification from the founder of FAC a few years ago.
Yes, it sets a precedent.
The Ex Post Facto I case has not been decided yet.
Ex Post Facto II was a huge victory for us as we can now register things online that we had to report in person.
I don’t know what you are referring to when you say, “I verified that to get clarification from the founder of FAC a few years ago.”
@FAC
A few years ago when the Ex post fact case was raising money to support the case, I asked the founder (Who stepped down later-un-related) if they win (Using money that donors from f.a.c donated) would the rest of us automatically win as well. She answered me honestly and said no, we would have to hire and use our own lawyers using the win as a precedent for each of our own individual cases.
All I am asking is sometimes a case that wins is for all of us (Like halloween signs) and some are just a win for those who were involved in the case, leaving us to use that case on a case-by-case basis with our own hired lawyer.
Thanks
Cherokee. I sometimes have no idea what you are talking about, but in this case I’m baffled. State facts. What founder of FAC stepped down and told you this? Which case in which we’ve prevailed have members not derived a benefit from? I just gave you an example of two (plus one pending) where every registrant in Florida, member or not, donor or not, derived a benefit from. Which case are you referring to?
I appreciate your concern, but to which case have you donated to that you have this concern. Our records don’t show any donations, which is fine. There’s no obligation. That’s not the point. But if you’re raising concerns, lay it on the table.
Gail Colletta. Had a long conversation with her a few years ago about the ex post facto. The post is on F.A.C but I am not going through 2 years of Posts to find it. She was even on here posting a few weeks ago and I tried to say hi on a post and your moderators denied me.
Gail Colletta is still very much involved in FAC. She is our President Emeritus and sits on our Board of Directors. I believe you might have misunderstood what she said.
With all due respect, Sounds like you made it a point. (My opinion) I was also wondering if the Clements case prevails, would it be for all offenders or just for the offender that filed the petition?
Clements’ case applies to Clements only. However, if the District Court in Clements finds that Sex Offender Residency Restrictions are tantamount to “in custody” to qualify for habeas status, it will be a tremendous win for the entire registrant community, as that finding will be used in future litigation.