Bad news out of the 10th Circuit: Millard v. Rankin reversed and remanded.
The order from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Millard v. Rankin was issued today and it’s not good news. The relief offered by the Colorado District Court was reversed.
A copy of the order can be found here, which is being shared without much commentary, as we are just digesting this: Millard-v.-Rankin Opinion
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
One difference between this case and our own Does v Swearingen (our Ex Post Facto Plus case)— here the registrants‘ lawyers “do not distinguish their case from binding precedent” such as Smith v Doe (Supreme Court 2003). But our case, from what I recall seeing in the amended complaint, does! And the facts of the Florida registry are different! They’re a lot different than what the Supreme Court considered in 2003. And am I right in observing that Florida’s registry laws are more harsh than Colorado’s?
See, this is what happens when you hire an attorney who’s an amateur when it comes to registry issues. Not just that they “do not distinguish their case from binding precedent,” but they also “fail to show,” “cite no case,” “do not connect this argument or otherwise explain,” and “fail to connect,” all of which is language contained in the above ruling. For suits such as these, choose your attorney wisely, or don’t choose one at all!
I’m grateful at least that all that 10th Cir precedent cited in the ruling, does not bind us here in Florida (yet).
FAC do we now have a circuit split between the 6th (on the one hand) and the 5th and 10th (on the other)? Or are they different issues?
Am I right that these are the first three federal circuit courts of appeal to weigh in on these issues?
The sixth circut laws are about expost facto that judge the ruled that is in visolation of constitution, what the attorney for colorado cases, argued was 8th and 14th amendments she should of argued expost facto and used michigan as an example
As usual, over-reliance on Smith v. Doe to say it’s not punitive just because the legislature didn’t intend it to be while completely overlooking that the legislature wrote out every facet that made it non-punitive to begin with. Can’t say I’m not surprised.
Same old argument that sex offender registration is NOT punishment. But when a statute makes it harder to find a job, hard to operate your own business, hard to find a place to live, impossible to enjoy public parks and recreation area paid for with your own taxes, and impossible to travel to other countries, what is it BUT a punishment. It also inflicts collateral punishment on your family members. Would the average person deem it to be punishment? That is how judged traditionally decided issues, NOT by considering the intent of the legislature. The Sixth Circuit got it right by calling it what it us, PUNISHMENT!
Disappointing, indeed but perhaps this will be the circuit split that will give SCOTUS a reason to, once and for all, decide if registries, in their present form are punishment
Let’s hope this move up the ladder.