“In-Person” Registration Requirement Submitted to the Supreme Court

[Thanks to a member for bringing this case to our attention]

A petition for Writ of Certiorari has been filed to the Supreme Court of the United States in Boyd v. Washington.

At issue in that case is whether the number of In Person registration requirements violates the Ex Post Facto clause of the Constitution.

In that state (as well as in Florida), the requirement that a person required to register as a sex offender go into their sheriff, in person, has increased almost ever year. Someone may only be required to register every six months, but in addition to the regular re-registration, now someone must go into their County’s registration office whenever they change vehicles, whenever they travel for 3 or more days and many more reasons.

Going in to register in person, is not a simple task. There is generally one location per county, so if you live on the opposite side of the county, that can include a long commute. If you don’t have a car, that can include hours on public transportation or costly Ubers or Taxis. If you do have a car, it can include costly courthouse parking. Then you have to wait in line at the registration office during times that are convenient to them, which can take hours. For reporting a 3 day trip, you would likely have to take an extra day off to accomplish the in person registration.

One of the reasons Smith v. Doe found the (2003 Alaska) registry to be non-punitive was because it didn’t require in person notification. Now, however, registries require frequent in-person appearances for a multitude of reasons. The Petitioner in Boyd is asking the SCOTUS to decide, “whether the requirement of frequent, in-person reporting renders an offender-registration law punitive, such that applying the law retroactively violates the Ex Post Facto Clause”:

If you are thinking this sounds familiar, you’re probably right. This challenge (for Florida) is one that we are actively working towards bringing!

So will this SCOTUS case render ours unnecessary? No. The Supreme Court receives about 7000 requests to hear cases per year and grants Certiorari (agrees to hear) only about 80 of those. So, essentially there’s a 1% chance this case will be heard. On the 99% chance it won’t be, we need to bring our own.

Also, the circuits and states are split as to whether frequent in person registration, applied retroactively, is punitive or “inconvenient”. If a case were brought in Florida and won (or had an injunction granted), it would only support the argument to the SCOTUS. Of course, a loss might do the opposite, but we’re optimistic that the recent changes to the Florida registration statute are irrationally burdensome and confident in our position.