A loss in Miami-Dade Sex Offender Residency Restriction Challenge
This afternoon the court issued it’s findings in the Miami-Dade Sex Offender Residency Restriction challenge and it is a loss.
A copy of the document can be found here and comments will follow after it’s digested and we speak with the ACLU attorneys.
Does v. Miami-Dade – Sorr – Order of Judge
It was anticipated that whoever lost will appeal. That’s still likely.
In the mean time, the court did rule that the case was not barred by the Statute of Limitations, which is helpful to the Ex Post Facto challenge.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Censored my last post because it did not conform to your futile and failed thinking? How about giving this one some thought.
By only prohibiting sex offenders from living within a 1,000 foot buffer zone has the “STATE” created a right for the restricted offender to live anywhere outside that that 1,000 foot buffer? Could it be argued that local governments enacting larger zones are therefore intruding on that State created right?
No Let’s continue to argue about recidivism and ex post facto
Is it me, or is the “not punitive because it wasn’t intended to be” conclusion some courts keep coming to when addressing any registry law making courts sound pretty stupid? Isn’t that like saying the Patriots didn’t lose the Super Bowl because they didn’t intend to?
Attention FAC and your ACLU Attorneys: I am your Huckleberry.
I do not care about recidivism rates of sex offenders. One side says its low, the other side says it’s “frightening and high”, neither side can disprove the other.
It doesn’t matter to me nor to any Court whether or not the residency restriction imposed by Metro Dade County is in fact the cause of the high number of sex offender transiency in the County since its enactment. Remedial or retributive? Noting “Nothing but the clearest proof will survive.”
All that matters to me is the rule of law, State constitutional law, State legislature intent, statutory construction, history, text and structure, of 775.215.
This inquiry will begin with or without the help of FAC.