Comments on: Legal Updates

By: Jacob

Jacob — Tue, 13 Jun 2023 19:34:08 +0000

In reply to JZ. Some provisions of the Jacksonville ordinance are now ‘worse’? Is this true? Anyone know what provisions JZ is referring to?

By: Tearfuleagle

Tearfuleagle — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 21:15:39 +0000

Was anyone there for Oral Arguments? If so what questions did the judge ask if each side? That can sometimes reveal which way the judge is leaning.

By: JZ

JZ — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 03:26:30 +0000

Be advised, the Jacksonville ordinance was not repealed. It was amended. All the other onerous conditions remain or are worse (IMO). We also still have a 2500′ residency restriction for SPs.

https://library.municode.com/fl/jacksonville/ordinances/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=1217053

By: Concerned

Concerned — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 00:30:46 +0000

In reply to Membership. Thanks, Membership. But nothing in the Middle District? I'd be a named plaintiff if you need one.

By: Membership

Membership — Fri, 09 Jun 2023 23:37:12 +0000

In reply to Eugene V Debs. Oral arguments were heard in May 2023 on the Motion for Summary Judgement. We are expecting an opinion from the Judge that we will share with the members. It is likely to move the trial date. We will keep you posted.

By: Membership

Membership — Fri, 09 Jun 2023 23:34:06 +0000

In reply to Darryl. Meet and Greet in Gainesville is planned for September. Date TBD, We will keep you posted.

By: Membership

Membership — Fri, 09 Jun 2023 23:31:00 +0000

In reply to Concerned. The original Ex Post Facto case was filed in the Southern District in 2018. It was dismissed on a statute of limitations (plaintiff complaint was past 4 years) , but we appealed to the 11th Circuit Court and WON the appeal so that case is went back to the Southern District court, We refer to it as the Ex Post Facto I case. While EPF I case was being appealed, we immediately filed a second Ex Post Facto case in the Northern District court ensuring plaintiff's complaint was within the 4 year limitation. We refer to that as the Ex Post Facto II case. The judge in the Northern Court is moving the EXF II case forward, whereas the judge in the Southern District Court has not yet started court proceeding on the EPF 1 case.

By: Peter P

Peter P — Fri, 09 Jun 2023 18:32:52 +0000

Hernando County recently passed an ordinance requiring “No Candy Here”. I emailed a county commissioner about this and he said that SO’s who shouldn’t be around children will have a sign in their yard. I then told him that according to my sentencing report, the judge in my case said that I was not prohibited from being around persons under 18, I was not prohibited from being in places where children gather, and I was not prohibited from living near schools, churches, playgrounds or anywhere. He told me that I’ll have to deal with it when Halloween comes around. I sent him another email and he refused to email me back. I don’t know if there’s any action being taken against Hernando County as far as the sign being unconstitutional. I’m not sure what to do if no action is taken.

By: Concerned

Concerned — Fri, 09 Jun 2023 17:51:59 +0000

Curious about the be venues for the Ex Post Facto cases. One was filed in the Southern District (I belive that’s now at the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals) and the other was filed in the Northern District. Why is there no filings in the Middle District?

By: Darryl

Darryl — Fri, 09 Jun 2023 17:21:56 +0000

Sure would like to see one of these “Meet and Greets” in Gainesville, Alachua County. I know that we have quite a number of citizens required to register in this city and county as I have been for the past 15 ½ years.