An excellent decision came out of Florida’s Fourth Judicial Circuit (Nassau County) Friday afternoon finding their Sex Offender Residency Restriction (SORR) Unconstitutional as applied to the Defendant (who was charged with violating the County SORR) whose offense date was before the enactment of the SORR.
You can read the decision here: State v Wright – Nassau County SORR Case
The tides are changing!
So tell me this I’m from brevard and my charge is from 1991.You mean to tell me that the resident restrictions didn’t apply to me? Because I had to move before because I was to close to a park and if this is true I will take off tomorrow and find me an attorney because of this so please let me know asap
CMC may be contrary, but they do raise a point that I have asked about for a while. Has anyone in the day County case or any other similar case argued that the state of Florida has, in fact, already declared that prior to October 1, 2004, residency restrictions were classified as punishment? As I have stated a number of times on this board, residency restrictions were, for the first seven years or so, statutorily mandated special conditions of probation a.k.a. punishment. That should solve the problem of anyone convicted during that time. In short order. Then The lawyers could get on to the more difficult task of arguing that you can’t take something that was punishment, extend its application to application to the lifetime of the defendant regardless of the sentencing guidelines for the specific offense, And then wave some kind of legal magic wand over the bill and declare it to no longer be punishment. FS 775.215 Also clearly states that the application of the section applies to those whose offense occurred after October 1, 2004. Yet these cities and counties a ledge and they have been given the authority to apply there enhanced residency restrictions To anyone who moved into a specific location after a date certain with no regard for when the registrant was convicted. Did I miss something?
With that said, I also must comment on CMC’s remarks about donating. There are times when many of us can’t afford even five dollars much less $5000. I have attempted on several occasions to volunteer to make some kind of “in-kind” contribution as I was an attorney before my offense. I’ve never heard anything back.
Florida State constitution PROHIBITS the Counties from imposing “PUNISHMENT”. So if a State Court rules that the legislators intended 775.215 to punish, than its out of the Counties purview. On the other hand if a Court finds 775.215 to be remedial than it would not preempt the County meaning the County would be free to extend the range and to regulate in the area as it sees fit.
As the Wright Judge Stated no one has ever challenged whether or not 775.215 was intended to be a Punishment.
In enacting Section 775.215, Florida Statutes, the Florida legislature expressed concern that its statutory residency restrictions could be viewed as punishment, and therefore that the restrictions could violate the ex post facto clauses of not only the federal but the state constitution.
See Senate Staff Analysis to Senate Bill 120, Ch.2004-55, Laws of Florida. For that reason, it deliberately exempted sex offenders whose crimes preceded enactment of the state law.
This is exactly what my attorney and whole case turns on if DOE V Miami Dade fails. ( Oral arguments to be heard in Miami on 6/6/2020).
If in fact if a Court finds 775.215 “PUNISHMENT” than State constitutional law prohibits home rule Counties such as Dade from imposing a greater punishment.
State constitutional does not prohibit the County from enhancing a “REMEDIAL” act. So whether or not 775.215 is ” declared PUNISHMENT or REMEDIAL carries a lot of wait in this State.
Pass it by your GREAT attorneys, maybe they can use it in oral arguments in Doe v Miami come June.
weight maybe?
Each individual client has to come up with thousands of dollars to pay their lawyers for each of these challenges and appeals. The counties, and states spend Millions each year defending them.
Here is the kicker, WE are also paying for the Governments defense against us because it is TAXPAYERS (US) money they use to pay for their legal defenses and challenges to our suits.
Kind of ironic and a point to ponder I’d say.
No, please do not do that. We don’t need more crappy lawsuits out there making bad precedent.
@FAC, I don’t see where anyone is advocating for a NEW lawsuit, just suggestions for an existing one.
Refusing once again to post my rebuttal to your crap comment? Name one case in the last 10 years that Val Jonas has prevailed.
Maybe one the internet identification case?
Correct me if I’m wrong. I believe it’s time for FAC to shake things, demand results, screen plaintiffs so not to embarrass us in depositions.
Rather than raise donations for this case or that limits why not just create a legal fund without limits.
Build a war chest. Solicit funding from every dues paying member. 5 bucks here 50 there $5,000 here.
Be transparent Provide annual or quarterly financial statements to members. I like to know how my investments are preforming.
Your a Not for Profit organization by including membership with voting rights we can be an association. We can become a power to be reckoned with to be feared.
Money = Power. It pays for lobbyists and attorneys which is much better than posting comments in the comment section.
I’m no schlep being secretary & treasurer of one of the largest Not for Profit taxi association in Miami I lived in court and worked very well with our legal teams.
Anyway someone once said “Bring on”….Let’s.
It’s true that we need to donate more to FAC’s legal challenges. And that our war chest is modest. I would not want to pay someone to prepare financial statements on such a modest amount. FAC legal challenge funds are spent on court transcripts, filing fees, and expert witness fees.
I am grateful for the FAC internet challenge— without it, using the internet would be burdensome to impossible for Florida residents. Has Val Jonas ever lost a case for us? If so, what was her mistake?
But you can’t just “demand results” from the courts. It doesn’t work that way. Nor can we demand an attorney to promise results. They’d lose their law license. All we can do is choose the best attorneys to make the best arguments, at their own risk. Have you seen the complaint filed in our ex post facto plus challenge, Does v Swearingen?
CMC,
Respectfully, you are offensive, but I’ll post your insulting comment so that I can respond.
Let’s see… of the cases we were involved in (in one manner or another), Val was lead attorney in our Internet Identifier case (WHICH WON IN A BIG WAY). She was also lead attorney in City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Anderson and Ford, which had the City of Ft Lauderdale Ordinance declared unconstitutional.
For her clients, she successfully appealed probation revocations of sex offenders, including a registrant from under the Causeway who broke curfew due to an emergency hospitalization and was sentenced to 25 years in prison. She successfully defended a sex offender with intellectual deficits disability in a probation revocation proceeding arising from a failure to register plea. She then persuaded the County that its residency restriction did not apply to him, allowing him to live with his wife, who also suffers cognitive deficits, and her parents. She vacated a failure to register conviction, succeeded in modifying the probation of a sex offender to permit contact visitation with his minor grandchildren. Successfully challenged the GPS-monitoring condition of his probation. Was successful in an ex post facto and substantive due process challenge to the registration statute, on behalf of a sex offender whose predicate offense – lewd and lascivious conduct with a girl two weeks short of her 16th birthday – was incurred twenty years ago. Removed from the Florida registry an out-of-state sex offender whose own state had released him from its registry… among many others.
And what about her performance thus far in the Ex Post Facto Plus case? Are you dissatisfied?!?!?
I’m not sure what you mean by “demanding results”? Is it up to us to dictate to a judge they NEED to decide one way or another? Which plaintiffs, exactly, have embarrassed us in depositions? You are clearly talking out of your ass without any insight or knowledge of what has been going on.
And there are no limits to what we are trying to raise – there are GOALS. Goals to let our members know what it will take to bring a challenge. We also have thermometers on our website so we can show, in complete transparency, how much has been raised for each challenge. Maybe you don’t appreciate that MOST of our members are unemployed or grossly underemployed because it’s so hard to find employment with this label? For many, a $5 donation means skipping a meal. How about instead of insulting smaller but very meaningful contributions you put your money where your mouth is? As an insider, I was able to confer with membership to see how much you’ve donated and you have no business insulting anybody!
We constantly invite individuals to volunteer and take a role in steering this organization. You’re talking up your qualifications but have you stepped up? No, you have not.
We moderate out many of your comments because they are usually misguided and disrespectful. We will continue to do so.
“For her clients, she successfully appealed probation revocations of sex offenders, including a registrant from under the Causeway who broke curfew due to an emergency hospitalization and was sentenced to 25 years in prison”
WOW. This right here proves how messed up registries are(not that we didn’t already know that). That is more than 90% of us got sentenced to for an “Actual” offense.
So the “non” punitive registry laws are basically a trap to send us all back to prison for life? Yes 25 years for many of people in my age bracket is probably longer than we will live as many of us have health issues. Some of which were caused by being incarcerated. ( I ended up getting hepatitis from bad food and was refused medical help )
Thanks for all you, the volunteers and legal teams do. When a time comes that I have more than $5 in my wallet, I will donate. Scared to death my county will impose registrations fees.
Oh to add to your defense F.A.C, were you not crucial in getting ClearMyCase taken down? I may be wrong but I know you brought heat on them.
That in itself is good enough for me. I was informed enough (as ex law enforcement) to not fall for their scam but many others were desperate and fell for it, losing large sums of money.
Not only that, but they sued us and we won! Got their case dismissed.
Also, not trying to come off as defensive or justify our existence, but think of how many of our members would have lost money to other scams or unscrupulous “legal services”.
This argument will be advocated very very very shortly..
I could make a comment about this situation but it probably would not be appropriate for the internet. This is murder by the Florida government…plain and simple.
When I was in the hokey, I nearly died and they would not allow me to use the phone to call my parents. I prayed and said “Lord either take me home or allow me to get word to my parents”.
A while later the Chaplin came around to check on me and I asked him to call my parents. He said he was limited in what he was allowed to say but whatever he said to my parents, an attorney called the next day and I was moved to another facility with a medical ward.
I can tell you, if I had died, they would have written it off as natural causes. I was 29 at the time. Nothing normal about a 29 year old dying.
On a side note, if you have ever eaten prison food, it is a wonder anyone survives. We ate potatoes and greens that were barely washed. I am sure during my time in, I must have eaten at least a pound of sand.
Actually the Fourth Judicial Circuit encompasses Duval, Clay, and Nassau counties. The Duval 2,500 foot rule for “predators” exempts persons who established the permanent residence prior to July 1, 2005. But, if you move to a different permanent residence, you will be in violation. So why can’t this decision be used to invalidate Jacksonville’s Sec. 685.102 (Sexual predators residency requirements) ?
Additionally, Clay County’s 2019 ill-advised ordinances (Sec. 15-44. – Residency requirements and Sec. 15-46. – Prohibited presence, loitering or prowling at certain locations; exceptions) have no date exemptions, therefore more ripe for ex post facto challenges.
Absolutely it could invalidate Jacksonville’s law. Mr. Wright established Nassau residence AFTER his offense.
Ok
Hello FAC
Would you please explain the Ex Post Facto law suite to someone who has contributed to the fund but really does not understand it.
. Who will it affect and how?
. My offence was in 1995, Conviction in 1998.
. Off probation 12/2012
Even if it will mot help me I’m glad to have helped in a financial way for others.
Hope to hear from you.
Thanks for all you do.
Certainly.
The “Ex Post Facto Plus” case (PLUS because it’s counts include; ex post facto PLUS other claims, such as due process and violations of privacy laws, among others) is Does 1-5 v. Swearingen. It was filed in the Southern District of Florida (case no. 18-24145) by Weitzner and Jonas (lead attorney Val Jonas) in 2018 and is scheduled to go to trial this November.
It will benefit all who were convicted (or plead) and then, as future “enhancements” were made to the Florida Sex Offender registry, were subsequently saddled with additional requirements and restrictions that didn’t exist when they committed their crimes, deprive them of certain constitutional rights. It has a few representative plaintiffs, but a win in that case will benefit all on the registry if declared facially unconstitutional or all who are similarly situated if declared unconstitutional as applied.
The funds we continue to raise do not go towards legal fees, but to actual costs to sustain the litigation, such as expert witness fees, depositions and transcripts, etc.
Thank you for supporting the challenge and thank you for thanking us.
The outcome of this case was good…..for now. But I am not sure if it goes far enough. Why can’t we get a Florida court to say that residency restrictions were statutorily mandated punishment a.k.a. special conditions of probation prior to 2005 and THAT is why the state has determined that they can’t impose them on anyone whose offense (correct answer) or conviction (incorrect) predates that change to the law that imposed the lifetime
Restrictions as part of registration?
In a word. It’s PUNISHMENT>
Does someone have a prevailing case law that provides jury instructive ”intent” in regards to FTR violation? How is it that someone is punitively punished for missing a registration? How does the state prove intent?
FTR is a strict liability crime. There’s no intent required. If you forget or didn’t know it is not a defense.
Seems that shouldn’t be punishable with a criminal statue. Are there other criminal examples of this?
Ok is there a case of jury nullification in a FTR?
FAC is not a law firm, we recommend consulting with an attorney
This was a very long read but I soaked up every word. It was a small ray of sunshine on the otherwise dismal situation most of us find ourselves in. Here is hoping, wishing and praying that more courts will finally put aside their biases and shoot down more of these Ex Post Facto laws as being illegal and punitive.
That is amazing. Not precedent though. It applies to the Nassau County Ruling only, not all counties. It can be utilized in an appeal but it is not controlling. There are 67 counties in Florida and only 20 are chartered. So this decision is a beginning. But looking at the facts in this case and the description of the defendant, Mr. Wright, it is very fitting. This case is FACT INTENSIVE AND HEAVY so that can also be weight AGAINST future defendants whose facts are not synonymous to Mr. Wrights in this case. Ex Post Facto, over 70 years of age, crime committed in an era where the offenses were categorically different, and specific punitive categorization by this Judge (finally). All previous courts have ruled in favor of the “…not punitive but protective” balancing act, which places society’s alleged safety above the defendant’s dignity. Safety has always won…until now…in Nassau County. Keep our fingers crossed that this trend will be contagious.
So others whose offense predates this ordinance will still be subject to it?
Good question. That would be a very small “win” if true.
Recently, I sent a Letter to the Editor for the Tampa Bay Times concerning the Tent City for the homeless during the virus crisis — no registrant need apply. The letter was never printed.
A commentary written by me (concerning the billions of dollars spent every year, in a time when our economy is tanking badly, to maintain the national registry to monitor hundreds of thousands of people who will never commit another sex offense) was edited by two gifted writers in the FAC leadership and sent to the Orlando Sentinel. It was never printed.
This same letter was sent by a FAC member to news outlets throughout the country. We have heard nothing back.
When I have time, I comment on articles. Often I am the only commenter and doubt that anyone even reads my comments. It is a little different for the New York Times and the Washington Post. If I comment there, I am anywhere from the 300th to 500th commentator, so I doubt that anyone notices what I write there.
So I do not presently see how any of my writings do any good.
But what I do know is that lawsuits get results. Some of us have been hurt financially by the shutdown, but some have not. I am ready to start giving again to the non-registrant collateral lawsuit and have it filed by the end of this year. Lawsuits are the only thing some politicians listen to. My check will be in the mail tomorrow. You can also donate at the website. Please donate if you are able to do so. Let’s keep the pressure on Florida.
SarahF,
Thank you!!! You are doing an awesome great job!!! Don’t despair but your letters not being published as your letters I’m sure are still read and educating many!!!
Thank You Again!!!
Tired Old Man
I never thought about it. You are right — someone probably has read my letters to the papers, as well as those from other FAC members. It only takes one person– the right person to read any one of our letters, and when the opportunity presents itself, act on one of them.
SarahF
Never feel as if what you do is insignificant. It very much counts more than you think. I too feel sorry for all that have been forced into homelessness and poverty, but I would like to see this reach much bigger proportions. Pres. Trump does a lot on Twitter. Whether you like him or don’t you have to admit he is now very concerned about the economy and has a good mind in trying to improve it. To save billions would help in any accounts books. Could you Twitter your letter to him , explaining it and hope for the best.
Missouri declared all add on laws to the SOR ex post facto and unconstitutional years ago. So have other states it’s got to go farther than that.
That is a very good idea. The Media Committee will take care of it.
Sarah, do not get discouraged. You are very special and an Angel for our side. I have never met you but prayers of hope, blessings and faith your way. Do not give up and never think you are not making a difference.
Without people like you and others, we would not even have an army to fight with.
Love all you do. * Sends virtual hugs *
Jack
Don’t worry — I have been told that I am a very determined woman. I don’t think it was meant as a compliment, but they were correct in their assessment of me. I have no plans of giving up but really look to lawsuits to do us more good than anything else.
SarahF, I assure you your letters do make a difference. We touch people that we don’t ever even know about. It is not always about Just the legislature person themselves, but their staff. Nor the editor, but their staff and so on. That is how minds are changed. So please know you are making a difference and are a blessing to us all. And I too am going to send in a check for the collateral challenge. Thanks for the reminder.
Thanks for your check, Mp, and your words of wisdom. The mailman just picked up my check.
Sarah, keep up your work. One day the right person will see the truth in what you have to say and things will start to change. Bless you for stepping into the arena. There is no victory sitting in the stands.
Sarah F I am reminded of what I was told by many people who supported me after my incarnation when I was feeling hopeless about everything. All you need is one. Keep writing eventually the right eyes Will see it read it and take it to the next level.
I’m reading this as it is the date of offense that matters, not the date of conviction. Is that correct? I ask because the date of my purported offense of intentional child porn possession predates the date of conviction by nearly three years. 2007 versus 2010 because it took the prosecutors that much time to line up their false evidence (still being disputed and litigated).
Not quite sure what to read into this. As I understand it, the court ruled the county ordinance is ex post facto. So how is the reasoning that the state statute – virtually identical except for the distance – is not ex post facto?
Really looking forward to how the appellate court answers that, assuming it goes to appeal. But on the other hand, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone contacted the county attorney to persuade him NOT to appeal this decision, specifically to avoid a statewide precedent on the issue.
The State Statute is NOT RETROACTIVE
Yes, but the State has essentially given tacit approval to the counties to do thing that the state can not do by their own reckoning
And sucks that localities are allowed to go above and beyond state laws. It even trickles down to cities sometimes seeming to have more power than the state.
What if Florida stated the drinking age was 21 which I believe it is currently. But then a city or county states “Well we want it to be 30 in our district so that is the new law here “. I doubt that would pass muster, however the state looks the other way when S.O laws are made tougher in cities and counties than what the state made.
When it comes to the application of laws, there is nothing united about the United States. We have thousands of fiefdoms run by petty politicians who have the power to turn their opinions…factual or not…into legal obligations.
If they are not careful, another civil war may come before WWIII. A lot of people are getting tired of contradictory laws.
For example, in Florida we can have window tinting. If you cross the line to another state just to visit, you get the choice of a court date or you can scrap it off in front of the officer.
I took the chance and didn’t get pulled over when I went to Georgia but the ticket would have cost more than I paid for the tint.
Two states have part of their states in daylight savings time and a small part of the state doesn’t. How does that even make sense
Thank the lawyers who fought this and got the win. Way to go Florida!!!!!!
The paradigm is changing because we are speaking up!
Please, everyone, take every opportunity to write emails and letters. Make phone calls. Every single time you see an opportunity to broach the subject or reply to it, please do so.
We must continue to insinuate these injustices into the national conversation – one person, one email, one conversation at a time!
The people who matter (judges and legislators) hear us eventually.
We must not lose this momentum! We must double down NOW!
That was a beautiful lunch time read.
The Jacksonville defense attorney appears to have done a thorough and persuasive job here. Somebody really did their homework on sex offenders.
I recall that we were struggling to add a northeast Florida attorney to FAC’s referral list. Any chance FAC legal could reach out to him to see whether it would be appropriate to include him?
Are you at liberty to share the name of this attorney? I assume it is one of the names listed at the end.
Looking at those three names and then googling them, I inferred that the second of the three was the defense attorney in this case.
I know we’re often mad at Rick Scott, but he appointed this sensible judge. Credit where credit is due.
@Jacob
You know that Judges in Florida are voted in yes?
Interesting read. For some reason the Judge had to start by saying “This Court does not find that the County’s legislative intent was punitive” but then goes on to find everything about it punitive.
Their intent, as shown by the ruling, is to make all of the county out of bounds for people on the registry evidenced by the 99.1% of the county that is within 2500′ of a bus stop. He goes on to clarify they can be around the bus stop during the day when the kids are there but they can sleep within 2500′, which usually happens at night, and the kids are gone. In other words, this law has no effect other than forcing registrants to leave the county.
This case does nothing for those people whose crime was committed after the date of the archaic rule. What needs to happen now is something who has been in the same boat whose crime was after that date in this county should take them to court because the Judge himself says it is punitive on just about every level and that by itself, Ex Post Facto notwithstanding, it unconstitutional.
Alan
I thought the same thing and even though it was not funny, for some reason I laughed out loud. I guess I was laughing at the contradiction of the statement.
I don’t think Ex Post Facto wins are that great. These idiotic laws need to be struck down across the board, not just for Ex Post Facto. They are idiotic laws if applied to anyone. Ruling Ex Post Facto somewhat legitimizes the laws. And they aren’t legitimate ever.
This will be binding on Duval, Clay. And persuasive authority statewide!
…if upheld on appeal I mean, duh.
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
Hope it reflects on all of south Florida, RSO RULES…..
These restrictions and ordinances might be of some value if they were put in place by politicians who had a lick of common sense and just a bit of knowledge about the subject that they are trying to control. Unfortunately that is not the case in either circumstance. Safety is the least of their concerns; trolling for votes from the uneducated public is their goal. They are willing to destroy lives and families if it will make the uneducated public believe that they are safer…which of course they are not, at least not because of the SORR. The public would be safer if law enforcement was used to get ‘real’ criminals off the street.
Is this as amazing as i think it is? Im assuming its just the residency restrcition thats unconstitutional or the basis of the timeframe? My offense was 1996 fed in new york. Accidentally exposed myself to this florida registration thing in 2016. Im assuming its the dates that are in question here: we cannot be held to a law that was written after our offense dates?
Is this as huge as i hope it is?
It’s huge
Given the Hell that is Florida and it’s criminal and civil systems from all of the corruption, bad politicians and pressures on the Judges to ignore very important human rights issues, I find it difficult to believe there are still impartial Judges left in the state. A win is a win, especially when it comes from the State of Florida.