IN: Great decision out of Indiana
A great decision out of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana was issued earlier this week.
Previously, people residing in Indiana who committed (and completed all sanctions relating to) offenses prior to the enactment of the Indiana Sex Offender Registry do not have to register. However, people outside Indiana who committed (and completed all sanctions relating to) offenses prior to the enactment of the Indiana Sex Offender Registry who later move to Indiana DO have to register. The same goes for someone who was living in Indiana, moved outside the state and then returned.
Federal Court Judge Richard L, Young found this result illogical. In his 37 page opinion he writes, “The state has offered no evidence that out-of-state sex offenders or those that leave and return are inherently more dangerous than resident sex offenders, and the court can think of none.”
But what is really great about this decision is that it is ANOTHER federal district court that has found the registry is PUNISHMENT!
You can read the decision below:
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
has anyone challenged the same law in KY?? if you were convicted in another state and move to KY .. automatic lifetime in registry.. just wondering
So what’s the cut off date in Indiana. When did it start for them? Say if I moved there? Would I have to register. I got off probation in 1998.
2006
In 2009 the indiana state supreme court ruled the registry as punitive and could not be applied retroactively. This is what set this other case into motion. Indiana is unique because of this earlier ruling.
Other than Florida’s i don’t think their or any other state’s registration laws toll the date from release of sanctions, the toll from the date of the offense.
Hey There the cut off doesn’t matter right now I’m still fighting the case but if you got your case before July of 94 you are good.
i supect that they will lose on appeal because of how the law is applied to people convicted in Indiana who are returning to the state. Some of he other parts of the decision have the possibility of being overturned IMO. I hope it turns out well because prior to finding out how they applied differing standards Indina was on my short list of possible destinations. On its facd, the India law looked like it provided an opportunity for removal after 10 year. On my list, it had a question mark beside it, so that means it wasn’t clear. IN the case of staes like Maine, Rhoide island and Connecticut, it was clear that a different standard applied to out of staters. What may be the most important thing to come out of a case like this is the possibility of the common “whichever is worse” laws being struck down. Those are the ones where the requirements for registration for out of staters are based on local law or law in the state of conviction, whichever one is more restrictive.
We won the appeal, but lost in en banc, but we had three points so we lost on the ex post facto part but they sent our equal protection argument back to the district court and we won that on may 31st of this year
Please share the link to the decision.
Let’s not forget that this only applies as ex post facto to those convicted prior to SORNA.
What I would like some judge to explain is how the same regimes are “regulatory” to those convicted afterward. Same restrictions, same requirements, and all the stigma that goes with it. The judge even cited how recidivism rates are among the lowest and that nearly all registrant convictions are for status (parole, probation, or registry) offenses as opposed to new crime of any kind.
Stevens was spot on in his dissent in Smith – “No matter how often the Court may repeat and manipulate multifactor tests . . . it will never persuade me that the registration and reporting obligations that are imposed on convicted sex offenders and on no one else as a result of their convictions are not part of their punishment.” (Also quoted in this opinion)
A legislature shouldn’t be allowed to bypass its constitutional restrictions (state or federal) with additional registry laws merely by claiming intent to be a civil, regulatory one. If it’s punitive for one, then it’s punitive for all. It shouldn’t continue once sentences are served, regardless of conviction date.
This made me chuckle from page 34 on the excessive applications of SORA by the state.
” the state cannot
use a sledgehammer to swat a bee. ”
Back in my younger years, I used a similar analogy when referring to cousins of mine who were a bit extremist in their methods of doing things. I’d tell them: “You don’t need a shotgun to a kill a cockroach ”
This 37 page opinion pulled back no punches. He pretty much covered everything we have been saying on these boards or blogs for years. Citing Snyder¸ 834 F.3d at 705, more often in the latter part of the opinion as well. Once again, labeling people as dangerous with no individualized risk assessment, hindering the right to travel, ex post facto, equal protection, pretty much everything. He also acknowledges that SORA today is far beyond what was originally intended with Smith(2003). This opinion is how I want SCOTUS one day to deliver an opinion with SORA. in a clear or distinct manner and just straight to the point — Enough with the B.S.
So let me get this right and please if I am wrong someone please tell me, so Indiana is saying as long as you were living there before the registry went into affect and you did all that was required you to do you will be removed but if you moved out of state then came back you will have to register???
Well I am lost this is really getting a bit ridiculous on how this government can do to you , maybe a NWO ( new world order) needs to happen or a civil war cause correct me if this is not alike slaverly cause I sure feel like this registry is like , heck they separated the slaves from the rest of the world are they not doing the same to people who have been convicted of a sex crime, not allowed to go to a park , or school or have a child live with you , sure does feel like We are living like a slave if you ask me except we do not have a region to go to for help. It like the whole world is not accepting us.
Judge agreed that it was ridiculous
I just got the appeal decision a few minutes ago. The judges decided in our favor 2-1 I would like to upload it if possible
If you send it to [email protected] it will be shared.
Brian
That is awesome. Hope it helps many there. Our turn in Florida seems to be within reach at times, then at other times, light years away. We all have legal indigestion.
so here’s the deal; Indiana’s attorney general, who left office to pursue other things, got it into his head that Indiana would become a haven for sex offenders and put it’s residents at risk, because the rates of recidivism are “frightening and high” as we all know lol. so that thinking has carried over to the newly elected attorney general. back in 2014 I challenged the state to give me relief but they said since I moved to Texas I had to now register for life. so yes you are correct if I had never left Indiana I would never have been in this predicament. so the aclu took my case and I have been fighting this for 4 years now soon to be 5, because they appealed it, and it’s going to the 7th circuit in Chicago so sometime next year we should a decision. keep your fingers crossed please.