Maine wants to make one probation violation for anything enough to send someone back to prison.
A Maine legislator is proposing the “Eliot Cutler Law.” Under the proposal, a person convicted of a sex offense who violates probation FOR ANYTHING would automatically have to serve the remainder of the previously suspended prison sentence after a first probation violation. The proposal isn’t law yet. It is still being developed and is expected to be considered when Maine’s new Legislature convenes in January 2027.
A probation violation is not necessarily a new sex offense (it hardly is) or necessarily a new crime at all. It can involve violating a technical condition imposed by a court. Yet this proposal would turn the first violation into a mechanism for imposing the remainder of a previously suspended sentence.
That is a dramatic shift from individualized sentencing discretion to automatic incarceration. Even in the Cutler case that inspired the proposal, three of the six “violations” were dismissed. One alleged violation in June was rejected when a judge found no probable cause supporting it.
FAC isn’t defending Cutler, his underlying crimes or not following the rules of supervision. We’re pointing out that when government starts treating a technical probation violation as an automatic ticket back to prison, individualized justice takes a step backward. Probation is supposed to be supervised liberty — not a trapdoor where one alleged violation automatically activates years of suspended incarceration.
FAC will continue to oppose laws that replace individualized justice with one-size-fits-all automatic punishment.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Another step in the prison state of a country. This is only the beginning.
And if it passes, then some of the probation officers are going to love that, if the officer is that type of person just wanting a reason to lock the person up. Mine was tough, but she also was fair and listened to me instead of yelling at me.
You can post comments on the article
What I don’t understand is that the registry is a status offense. It’s not supposed to be a punishment just a “status”. That what Florida labels it as anyway.
Robinson v California (1962)
– The Supreme Court ruled that a law making the status of narcotics addiction a criminal offense violates the Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual punishment clause. The Court stated that an addiction is an illness and cannot be punished as a crime where no overt act or purchase occurred within the state
–
– In the Powell vs. Texas (1968) Court established the status-conduct distinction: Texas was not punishing him for being an alcoholic (status), but for appearing drunk in public (conduct) which created a public health and safety hazard
– City of Grant Pass v. Johnson (2024) homeless is a crime (status) Reaffirmed this framework, noting that while the government cannot criminalize a baseline status, regulating public behavior and public spaces does not violate the Eighth Amendment.
To quote the Florida state statute “The designation of a person as a sexual offender is not a sentence or a punishment but is simply the status of the offender which is the result of a conviction for having committed certain crimes.”
But what conduct are we violating? Laws that only apply to us. Of course you will have a 100 percent chance of failure to abide by probation standards and incarceration when the legislative branch is jury judge and executioner over the “conduct”
At what point do you say it’s labeled in the criminal section it’s treated as criminal conduct it’s a criminal offense to be a registered person.
No other status a person carries a lifetime sentence of felony punishment simply for the status of being a registrant.
Interesting considering there is not individual assessment of the person who is an alleged alcoholic or sex offender as noted above, but merely a conviction dictating a status.
Should a person who is appears in public intoxicated be labeled a drunk because they may considered a hazard to themselves and the public possibly if they are intoxicated or does it take more than one instance (repeated) for this to apply? Maybe the people who assign these titles need to be around college campuses more to see what the younger generation does and assign them labels. Does one who is convicted more than once for a DUI/DWI regardless of the substance get labeled a drunk driver? No, they are not.
An offender is a preset tense term for anything. We are all offenders of one thing or another if we consider how many laws are broken per person daily.
An alcoholic (where the preferred term is addict) is a term of one who has been diagnosed as such by a professional who then prescribes treatment and then can become a recovering alcoholic (or addict) given the status of the person who has been treated and continues their treatment with support.
Status labels are defamatory at best and should be legally done away with even after assessments by professionals who work to help the person.
It is funny that you mention DUI cases, because I use that in alot of conversations and debates in defense of the registry. Did you know that recidivism rates for DUI are at 34 percent as of 2024? 34 percent of people caught for DUI’s do it again, and those are only the ones that get caught. (As you may know, That is a huge argument about/against persons forced to register). Off the top of my head I can’t remember the stats of how many victims injured or killed by people driving under the influence, but I do remember that it is much higher than SO so cases. I will not defend or negate the crimes of either side, but with such a huge gap and such high recidivism rates, why are other high(er) recidivism crimes not heald to the same standards as people on the SO registry with the same non punitive consequences 🙄. Should a person convicted of a DUI be arrested for being within 1000+ feet of a liquor store or establishment that sells alcohol? Maybe be banned from ever driving again, because they MAY at some point want to get intoxicated and drive. I personally would want to know if my neighbor has a DUI conviction, just so I know to let my kids know to be extra vigilant and watch out for J Doe, they may be intoxicated and might run you over while waiting for the school bus or walking home from the bus stop. If it’s to protect the kids, if it only saves one child, ban them from driving through school zones and bus stops, because they could be intoxicated and run over one or multiple unsuspecting children just trying to go home to their families or trying to go to school to get an education. Again, if it saves even one single child from being a victim, it has to be a good idea, right?
I like this analogy and concur that DUIers are vastly more harmful to children and people in general. You should copy/paste most of your comment into the site’s comment section.
There are alot of statistics and recidivism comparisons out there. I often wonder why it is not really used in litigation….. I actually pick DUI because I have seen first hand the impact of it and also recidivism at it’s finest with it, both caught and uncaught. I myself, although never actually getting a DUI, can assure you that there was a period in life where I absolutely should have been caught, not just a few times, but probably in the hundreds. I have been sober for years at this point (over 6 years, with July 4th 2019 being my last drink) but still wonder how many people could have fallen victim to my ill decisions. One month after ending DUI probation, my ex got behind the wheel under the influence at about 10am and had a head on collision with a pregnant woman. Luckily the woman and baby survived, but still a victim. My ex flatlined several times and was placed on probation yet again after over 2 years of court precedings, and violated several times for more DUI’s before being sent to prison. Now that she is out of prison, she is back at it again, and is probably just a matter of time before she is caught again. She is in NE, our kids and myself live in FL. So that is why DUI holds such a placement that I am mildly rough on.
There are many other crimes that have higher recidivism rates than ours that tend to escalate that are not scrutinized nearly as bad as ours. We are the only ones that have such an open wide database to date. The other “registries” that are out there require you to know the name or part of the name of the offender and they only provide minimal information, nowhere near what is provided about us. I feel that if we are going to have registries, make them for ALL crimes, make them equal, and if we can’t make them equal, abolish them.
Wait until next month when the Jack o’lantern fest happens on Oct 31 and no one is paying attention to those who drink and drive while minors are out and about (on a Saturday no less this year) because they are focused on signs, etc for those who don’t deserve the attention.
I’ll tell you why… because people normalize behaviors that they themselves do and demonize behaviors of others. People will rationalize their own lapses in judgement from the smallest to the biggest.
It is quite rare for people to take authentic responsibility for their own actions, yet these same people will demand 100% accountability of others’ actions. The hypocrisy is too obvious to not notice. Drunk “I’m an AG” woman is a perfect example of this.
Well………………..
Let us not get too judgmental about what people think of us. The reason I say that is, before most of us became a registered sex offender, most of us would have been disgusted by them the same way we are treated. I guess it is that “If the shoe was on the other foot” scenario.
Who ever thought a bunch of us who are registered would get together and become friends, or at least form an alliance (FAC). If it wasn’t for this site, we would most likely being arrested over some stupid made-up accusation by law enforcement. At least now we have an advocate (Or many) on our side.
We who offended turned over someone else’s life in a bad way and now we are paying the price and also having our lives tilted upside down forever unless something gives. I want to be removed from the registry, but I also know that what I did to someone is going to hurt them for the rest of their lives as well. I wish I could ask them forgiveness but am banned from ever having contact with them, which most of us are without anyone saying we are, we just know we are.
Thanks for listening.
Once again, we see 2 sets of justice (at least, a proposal for that).
I have stood in front of the highest court in this land and read the engraving in the marble ediface: “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW”.
We must stop having 2 sets of justice in this nation!
SIGH!!! When the laws become harsher and harsher and constantly changes, it ups the possibility of violations.
This does not increase the possibility of violations. Just the consequences for a violation
When they’re actively looking for more and more things to violate people for, there will be more violations. It’s like giving cops ticket quotas. PO comes over, plants some contraband, and you’re gone. Cops go out to talk to neighbors because you moved in nearby and suggests that if someone were to make some calls…etc. The tougher they make it, the tougher it gets. That pesky constitution is the only reason most of us aren’t in prison or disposed of in some manner. Politicians need a boogie man. Keep the proles in fear because a fearful population is a compliant one.