Florida can keep ‘sexual predator’ marking on driver’s licenses, appeals court rules
The case arose after a sexual predator was sent back to prison after his probation officer found a smiley-face sticker covering the label on his license.
Florida can continue branding convicted sexual predators on their driver’s licenses.
In a divided ruling, the 5th District Court of Appeal has upheld the constitutionality of requiring state-issued driver’s licenses and ID cards to have “SEXUAL PREDATOR” stamped on them if the holder has been convicted of such a crime.
The ruling reverses an earlier panel’s action striking down the law as unconstitutional compelled speech.
In a 31-page opinion issued Friday, Judge Jordan Pratt wrote that the designation represents the state’s message, not the individual’s, and does not force offenders to “publicly display or disseminate the message” beyond ordinary license checks .“Any reasonable observer will understand that it’s the State’s message that Crist is a sexual predator, just as it’s the State’s message that he is licensed to drive in Florida and has a certain ‘date of birth, height, weight, or eye color,’” Pratt wrote.“And by marking Crist’s license … rather than his front yard, office entrance, business advertisements, personal vehicle, or custom website, the State has not compelled Crist to publicly display or disseminate its message.”
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Or mailing flyers to the neighbors. Or phone calls to neighbors and they do both
Although disappointed in the decision, one other thing caught my interest. The last comment, where the judge wrote that “And by marking Crist’s license … rather than his front yard, office entrance, business advertisements, personal vehicle, or custom website, the State has not compelled Crist to publicly display or disseminate its message.”
That begs the question to me, at least, does that mean that the sheriff’s office posting signs in one’s neighborhood, posting flyers, or even in one’s yard would fall under the category of illegal? Hmmmm.
Mark
There were long lists of things they got away with when we were on probation/house arrest, but once offer paper, it is insane we still have to have labels, signs, registrations and a long list of other requirements that no other groups have to abide by. For example, designations on our drivers’ licenses.
F.A.C fought and won the fight over the Halloween sign ordinances, but we still have an uphill battle on so many matters that put us and our families in harm’s way. When I was on probation and had to go through offender group counseling, one of the guys spoke up of how he had to home school his kids because they got bullied at school because of their dad being on the registry.
Well said Cherokee. Well said
Can you image on the DL/ID at any moment having to whip it out to prove who you are and there is a stamp on it with DUI xZ (DUI times Z number of DUI convictions on it) to show all? It does not matter if they have been rehabilitated, gone sober, done all they need, but still show this on their DL/ID for the rest of their days? They’d move for a least restrictive method to show this data ASAP in the next legislative session.
You know, I have No Problem going public and put a face on this whole crap!
Like I had said in prior post, case was 1997 and since then laws keep changing, adding more crap on is, and we have no say what so ever, but this was NOT what our legal supposedly bidding agreement (my plea bargain ) stated I was to get.
Isn’t that a “breach of contract” of some sort?
30 years, phycologist saying that I am no threat, probation officers and the local sheriffs office giving me awards for the donations I make to youth ranches, vets, and toys for tots…
And that all mean “Jack sh-t”
I am more than willing to put a face to it!
Someone needs to stand up to this, let me know if your interested.
Sure – reach out to [email protected]
Arnold
They get away with it by saying it is not punishment; therefore we are not being punished. They say we are not in custody or on any paperwork (Those of us who are not) and the registry is not punitive. As long as judges look the other way, we have a long road ahead.
My crime was in 1991 and still being punished, regardless of what the courts say. I wish a judge would spend a month with one of us undercover and see what it is like for us and our families. Once a rock comes through our window, or our tires are slashed, will that then be punishment or just the consequences of our “non” punishment scheme?
What about the Federal Case of Lane Kirkpatrick versus David Kerner? Which is also challenging compelled speech on photographic identification in the State of Florida as well.
That’s still going, but Kerner filed a notice of supplemental authority, which the Court then entered an order “directing the parties to provide supplemental briefing, no later than 9/19/2025, up to fifteen pages, regarding Crist v. State, No. 5D2022-2966, 2025 WL 2371385 (Fla. 5th DCA, Aug. 15, 2025).” So it seems as though the Court is taking the Crist case as instructive of their decision. It’s not a good sign.
Which would be interesting given the 2019 Fed case in AL of the same type found it to be compelled speech on the DL/ID.
Other states are not Florida. Florida is bad.
I hear you, agree, and understand.
FLA stands on its own here in this type of action, but the Fed AL case is very persuasive as is any info able to be gleaned from the Oklahoma filing of the same type of case. Not saying it will persuade FLA if appealed to the highest FLA court or even this Fed FLA case to see the same as in the Fed AL case.
The beauty of the call for supplemental docs is both parties get to opine on the FLA state case for the Fed judge, especially those for the gent challenging the law as they get to share how the FLA en banc review got it wrong while the lower court got it right as well as the en banc dissenters did too. The opining judge got his message wrong about state data from personal data, IMO.
I can say if FLA courts allow this, IMO, it becomes a slippery slope to other convictions being published on DLs/IDs as I noted in a older post here (e.g., DUI xZ) in the comments using a similar SVP stamp. A DUI stamp becomes more about than just saving children but saving all of society too when one considers serving or selling booze to one who has a DUI stamp, as an example.