Ex Post Facto Lawsuit Filed
A lawsuit was filed in Federal Court challenging the Florida Sex Offender registry. The suit is a facial challenge, filed on behalf of persons required to register in the State of Florida.
It argues that the registry violates the Ex Post Facto clause of the constitution, constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment, violates Procedural Due Process, violates Substantive Due Process, is unconstitutionally Vague, has no rational relationship to its purpose and asks the Court to permanently restrain and enjoin the FDLE from enforcing the registration statute.
This is the suit we have been waiting for!
FAC offers a special thanks to attorneys, Val Jonas and Todd Scher for bringing this case, to Beth Weitzner, Jeanne Baker and all the other attorneys who assisted in researching and drafting the complaint, and to all of our members who contributed to help make this possible.
A copy of the complaint can be found here: Does v Swearingen – Complaint
We will keep you apprised of the progress.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
the US Supreme Court rule expost facto in applied to criminal cases not civil case However the writers of the constitution didnot express that throry or belief I belive when a perons liberty is strip without a hearing or during a court sentence that was injoyed prior to having liberty removed is a violation of the expost facto law >>WHY when someone is sentence to incarceration their liberty is strip from them to be confined in and limited prevaledges are allowed, when a statute strips a person from thier liberty taking them out of thier residence taking their jobs and causing them to live homeless and below profety with out an oppertunity to get a job is punishment,, thus EX POST FACTO DOSE APPLY.
What has come of this case? Plus is there an attorney in Saint Petersburg fl, that would help with my case? Charged in 89, forced to plea in 90, on a hearsay, no evidence charge. Placed on registry in 2006. Suffering ever since.
Sounds almost identical to the Texas case that just got thrown out from a motion to dismiss posted recently on 11/21/2018. Any update for the community to be aware of?