MI: Great Decision: Defendants Convicted of 2011 Registry Amendments May Be Entitled to Relief!
A great decision came out of the Michigan Supreme Court last week!
Gary Shaver was convicted of sex offenses as a juvenile in 2004. At that time, Michigan’s sex offender registration law (SORA) required him to report address changes within 10 days. Years later, Michigan significantly expanded SORA in 2011. The new law imposed much stricter requirements, including requiring address changes to be reported within three business days and making more information publicly available.
In 2015, Shaver updated his registration to reflect a planned move, but the move fell through. As a result, his registered address was inaccurate for 19 days. He was convicted of violating the 2011 version of SORA and eventually received a lengthy prison sentence after a probation violation.
In 2021, the Michigan Supreme Court decided People v. Betts, holding that the 2011 version of SORA was so punitive that applying it to people whose offenses occurred before 2011 violated the constitutional prohibition on ex post facto punishment. In other words, the state could not retroactively impose those harsher registration requirements on people convicted before the law changed.
After Betts was decided, Shaver asked the courts to throw out his 2015 conviction because it was based on the unconstitutional 2011 SORA requirements.
The key issue was: Does the Betts decision apply retroactively to people whose convictions were already final before Betts was decided? If yes, Shaver’s conviction could be vacated. If no, his conviction would stand.
The Court unanimously ruled that Betts does apply retroactively! The Court reasoned that Betts announced a substantive constitutional rule, not merely a procedural one. The Court explained that Betts effectively prohibited a category of punishment — criminal enforcement of the 2011 SORA requirements — against a class of people whose underlying sex offense convictions occurred before the 2011 amendments.
The result is, people like Shaver can challenge convictions based on those unconstitutional requirements.
Now before someone asks in the comments… NO, this decision is not binding on Florida. This decision potentially affects many people convicted of violating Michigan’s 2011 SORA requirements when their underlying sex offense convictions occurred before 2011. However, this case is persuasive when it comes to arguing similar issues here in Florida.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I just copied this from above. In 2021, the Michigan Supreme Court decided People v. Betts, holding that the 2011 version of SORA was so punitive that applying it to people whose offenses occurred before 2011 violated the constitutional prohibition on ex post facto punishment. In other words, the state could not retroactively impose those harsher registration requirements on people convicted before the law changed.
MY QUESTION IS:
Why has this not already happened in Florida? Is it not the same ex post facto punishment?
I asked this before. Is anyone challenging this? Is this going to take years? Why is Michigan so ahead of Florida in these cases? I just do not get it.
Connie, you might not be getting our weekly updates. Contact [email protected] to make sure you are on the distribution list.
In related news for us, Ron Desantis is ineligible to run again in the 2026 Florida gubernatorial election and will leave office in January 2027. I wonder what the next Governor we get will be like towards us? Florida has not been given us too many wins other than Halloween and a few other minor wins.
Getting off the registry in Florida is harder than winning the lottery in my opinion.
It’s true that several candidates are running to be our next governor. Congressman Donalds, for example.
But it’s rare for us to see governors get very involved in registration issues.
Plus you have to keep in mind that Florida remains a conservative law-and-order state, and sex offender registration remains popular among voters here.
Jacob
Even with Desantis, I never once really heard him on the news talk about sex offenders. He may have signed a lot of the Bills etc, but I rarely hear him talk about us, like he has other issues to deal with. No politician wants to end their career by being soft on Sexual offenders.
Where are the law enforcement officers checking in on murderers? Where are they registering?
Other than being in a data base, once their sentences are over, they seem to get a pass unless they get arrested again. What about the 10 time DUI offenders who keep getting out of jail and going to counseling, until they end up killing another driver.
Seems all the focus is on us and so is the billions of funding for Registry officers around the country.
How many parks, schools and shelters they could build with those funds. And I always like to end these by asking “Why doesn’t the supreme court care about justice, when it comes to us?”.
Our Attorney General is always hot on this topic.
However, if someone was on Michigan’s registry, visited Florida, and registered in Florida, then if their registry requirements in Michigan were unconstitutional, then doesn’t that affect Florida registry?