Certiorari DENIED in Snyder and Karsjens – SCOTUS and Florida Sex Offenders
News from SCOTUS on Sexual Offender Laws
It’s now official – Certiorari has been denied in Snyder and Karsjens
What’s next for Florida Sexual Offenders?
Our position on Snyder from last week stands. That was; if the SCOTUS felt there were no reviewable issues in the 6th Circuit Decision finding the registration requirements constituted ex post facto PUNISHMENT, this is not a bad outcome.
We now must move forward with our own challenge.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Was wondering, the attorney in the McGuire case did not cited the troubling statement in the Packingham case. The Packingham parenthetical is a very powerful antidote to the registry. Numerous opd-Ed articles and lawyers have referenced it. Judge Matsch (Colorado case) has used it in his opinion. One Federal circuit (2nd) mentioned it in dicta (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1870134.html) panel from a state appellate court in Indiana (John Doe, et al. v. The Boone County Prosecutor) read it during oral argument. When combined with cert denial to the Snyder case, I think it speaks volume! That’s why I was curious as to why (even in the latest addition to his briefing) the attorney in McGuire case did not used it to empowered his arguments! I mean if THAT has being used by judge to help his decision carry more weight, it surely has to be important!
you’ve asked this question on the california blog too. Why don’t you write the attorney’s office and ask them.