Michigan must rewrite sex offender registry law
News from SCOTUS on Sexual Offender Laws
DETROIT (AP) — Michigan’s sex offender registry law must be rewritten after the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday let stand a decision that found the state was treating people as “moral lepers” by saddling them with excessive restrictions.
The Supreme Court turned down an appeal from the state, 13 months after a federal appeals court struck down many retroactive rules as unconstitutional.
In 2006, Michigan lawmakers changed the law to prohibit registrants from living, working or even loitering within 1,000 feet of a school. Five years later, the Legislature said registrants should be divided into three tiers solely on the type of conviction, not based on any individual assessment. The rules were made retroactive.
The law “resembles, in some respects at least, the ancient punishment of banishment,” appeals court Judge Alice Batchelder wrote for the 3-0 majority.
The court said Michigan presented no evidence that residential restrictions were having positive effects. One plaintiff in the lawsuit is on the registry because of a non-sexual kidnapping.
The court said a requirement that registrants check in frequently in-person with police has “no relationship to public safety at all.”
“The Legislature is going to have to go back and address these issues,” said Miriam Aukerman, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit with University of Michigan law school. “This requires the Legislature to adopt laws that keep us safe and are grounded in research and fact.”
Sen. Rick Jones, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he’ll invite the ACLU, state police and prosecutors to discuss the next steps.
Well I noticed last Friday that they moved my registration date back to 11-22-1995, when just 2 weeks ago, it said my conviction date of 6-19-1992.
So like Michigan’s ACLU said they have to make the changes, they have no choice now, and they can’t put it off, or ignore it. My questions now are, 1) when will I be put back to 25 years and have the tier 3 stigma removed. 2) or since the registry never existed in 1992, and I was never ordered by a judge to register will I be removed altogether, because even though I was on parole when the registry came into existence, my plea agreement/contract never said anything about a registry, therefore it was a violation of the plea agreement/contract.
a violation of due process, and separation of powers or at least should be, in my opinion. 3) I also think if I am not automatically removed, then it should go back to the 1994 version where I should not be on the public registry, and only available for the Michigan State Police to see NOT the public. 4) when they move me back to 25 years that will be 2020 when I am 51, but if I remember correctly I should be able to petition for removal, since I am well past the 10 year mark with out any other convictions, and I was considered a low-risk offender back in the day. Any one have any thought’s on this ? thank you.
Bobby we’ve been through this before. FAC is not a legal organization. Please ask these questions to a lawyer licence to practice in the state of Michigan.
@Mike
Yes your right I forgot about that, but the only problem with asking a lawyer, is for the simple fact is Lawyer’s and judges for that matter are not really licensed to practice anything. WHY you may be thinking because they ONLY have union due cards with a P on them followed by some random numbers. If you ask a lawyer or judge to produce their license they can’t do because they DON’T EXIST. The ONLY thing they do have is their union due cards, and some diploma’s on the wall.
HMMMM…. Not really sure where this is going.
At least in Florida, Lawyers (and Judges) have licenses to practice law, which are issued by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida and membership in the State Bar. If you ask most lawyers (or judges, for that matter) to produce their license, they should be able to produce their Bar card. They are required to list their Bar Number on pleadings too.
When I pled nolo in 1998, 1997 laws were in effect. Statute 943.0435, the only one that applies to my case, was so very small in 1997 compared to today. The 1997 statute doesn’t indicate that one must register if one pled nolo (like the 1998 version does) – it just says that it doesn’t matter whether adjudication was withheld. Also, it doesn’t state that registration is for life, like the 1998 statute does. Under the 1997 statute, I would only need to appear at the sheriff’s office after my initial ‘conviction’ and then each time, if ever, my address changed. It’s such a SMALL statute.
Also, does anyone know how long Michigan may take to change its laws? Since their changes over the years are now considered illegal, shouldn’t they be required to stop enforcing them immediately?
Really. No re-write is necessary. I have a copy of the law as it was just before 2006. As far as I am concerned that is all that applies to me. If the state wants a copy I would be glad to send them one.