Weekly Updates

Dear Members and Advocates, I’ll preface this update by reminding everyone that FAC stands strongly opposed to sexual assault of any kind. While we may object to the way offenders are dealt with by the criminal justice system and especially upon their release from that system, the underlying offenses are deserving of punishment. The #metoo movement has created a culture

Dear Members and Advocates, Please join us tomorrow night for our monthly member call. The topic of the call will be a legal update covering recent court decisions across the country impacting people required to register, with a specific focus on the status of our Florida Ex Post Facto challenge.  Our speaker will be attorney Val Jonas, of Weitzner &

Dear Members and Advocates, Last week, our Legal Chair of Florida Action Committee attended the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) conference. The topic of this conference is “Shattering the Shackles of Collateral Consequences” and it focused on strategies to eliminate barriers to reentry and the enduring challenges that come along with a criminal conviction. As we know all

Dear Members and Advocates: There are two topics you learn not to discuss in mixed company; religion and politics. Everyone has their own opinion on both and you never know who you might offend by presenting a point of view in either. The topic of this week’s update is religion and politics. FAC is not affiliated with any religious or

IMPORTANT:  NEW PHONE NUMBER FOR MONTHLY MEMBERSHIP CALL EFFECTIVE 8/2/2018 – SEE BELOW. Dear Members and Advocates, A little known US Supreme Court case that was decided earlier this summer can provide useful nuggets of value in an upcoming appeal concerning the First Amendment rights of a fellow sex offender law reform advocate. More than a decade ago, an outspoken

IMPORTANT:  NEW PHONE NUMBER FOR MONTHLY MEMBERSHIP CALL EFFECTIVE 8/2/2018 – SEE BELOW. Dear Members and Advocates, “Proof” is a term commonly heard inside a courtroom. You must prove your case. Which side has the ‘burden of proof’? And then to what standard must your proof meet? Is it a preponderance of the evidence? Is it beyond a reasonable doubt?