NJ Supreme Court finds Ex Post Facto violations as applied to 4 sex offenders
Yesterday, the New Jersey Supreme Court found that 2014 changes to the “community supervision for life” component of sex offender registration, which included enhanced punishment, could not be applied retroactively against 4 registrants whose offenses pre-dated the changed law.
In finding the laws violate the ex post facto provisions of the NJ and Federal Constitution, the court held:
“The Federal and State Ex Post Facto Clauses bar the retroactive application of the 2014 Amendment to defendants’ CSL violations. The 2014 Amendment retroactively increased the punishment for defendants’ earlier committed sex offenses by enhancing the penal ties for violations of the terms of their supervised release. The Amendment, therefore, is an ex post facto law that violates the Federal and State Constitutions as applied to defendants.The Court affirms the judgment of the Appellate Division dismissing defendants’ indictments.”
A copy of the full decision can be found here: https://www.njcourts.gov/attorneys/assets/opinions/supreme/a_91_16.pdf?cacheID=KCFsuXH
The correlation to Florida would be the recently enacted law that increases the punishment for a registration violation to include a mandatory minimum sentence of 6 months probation with GPS monitoring. In the words of the court, “a law that retroactively imposes additional punishment to an already completed crime disadvantages a defendant”.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I think this is wonderful news because Megan law came from New Jersey now the Courts are waking up and seeing Ex fact violation laws. Gail and Gang if u going to attack registry can u mention those before 1994 too because I am a pre1994 conviction and it wasn’t in my plea bargain I was duped by the public pretender’s office
In these United States how can something be unconstitutional in one state and not unconstitutional in all the states? Could it be that the legal system is just ‘playing games’ with the citizens?
If it’s unconstitutional under one state’s constitution, it may be constitutional under another’s.
If it’s unconstitutional under the US constitution, it’s unconstitutional in all.
If a State Supreme Court makes a ruling, it is binding in that state.
If the US Supreme Court makes a ruling, it is binding in all.
So, let me get this right.
The Constitution is the top of the law. It is what all other laws are based on. (OR so we are led to believe)
Now I may be wrong, please correct me if I am. But From the Constitution comes law.
Then we have the Supreme Court.
Then State Court.
Then county, city, town.
If I am right on the above, then tell me WHY doesnt the Constitution supersede State Law?
If the Constitution is interpreted by Supreme Court and the courts have ruled….
I am confused…??
You are totally confused, but this is not the right forum to get an education on these things.
Constitutions (state or federal) protect people’s rights and freedoms.
Statutes (state or federal) set the laws, but statutes must not violate any rights or freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
Statutes violate our rights and freedoms guaranteed by the US/State Constitutions on a daily basis.
Is it possible then that an act is constitutional by a state constitution and yet unconstitutional by the Federal constitution? Have I then all along been under the false impression that the Federal constitution takes precedence over a state constitution? I have never experienced such a convoluted set of laws…constitutional and unconstitutional…to run a country. How can anyone…citizen or law enforcement…keep up with any of it? It’s getting to the point where when anyone steps foot outside their home…and maybe not even there…they are walking on ‘thin ice’. Living a law abiding, tax paying, fiscally responsible life is no longer a guarantee of anything. This is what ignorant voters have allowed to happen.
Generally, state constitutions mirror federal. Some states have greater constitutional protections than federal.
It is confusing, but think of it this way… recreational marijuana use is legal in Colorado but it’s federally illegal. As long as you’re within Colorado you can use. HOWEVER, even if you are within Colorado, but you touch anything that would fall under “interstate commerce”, such as buying it online, paying with a credit card, taking it outside the state, the federal government has jurisdiction and you are hit.
The US is unique in that each state has their own laws, but the country has it’s own separate laws.
Same thing with municipalities. There’s no Federal SORR (residency restriction), but there’s a state one and inside the state of Florida there are county SORRS and some cities have their own ordinances.
If recreational marijuana is federally illegal then it should be state illegal. If the federal government doesn’t want to get involved in the fiasco then it should drop its laws concerning marijuana and turn the subject totally over to the states. We have a similar problem with legal/illegal immigration. Everybody is in charge and nobody is in charge. Any wonder our society/culture is so screwed up?!
“Some states have greater constitutional protections than federal.”
Yup, I was impressed by the greater constitutional protections of Pennsylvania with it’s people compared to the federal when their supreme court found both the state and federal Sorna unconstitutional with the Muniz case.
States closer to the Founding Fathers
Fight
Cap’n Charles,
What is really sad is that back in my day (im 60) we stood for the flag, Pledged our allegiance every morning at school. We believed our government, police, laws. It is now all perverted by money.
And people like you; who signed a check payable with your life; fought for the Rights, the flag and our country.
Only to come back (and years later) you are here, being abused by the system you fought for.
I apologize to you Sir.
I wish that all of us would come together and have a real discussion. About HUMAN rights. What happened to the “being” in Human Being??
Sean, thank you for your comments. I happen to believe it is wrong to apply a ‘debt’ that last forever to someone’s life. When it comes to human rights, I believe federal law…constitution…should apply to all US citizens. If a state wants to establish speed limits, have at it; if a state wants to establish education standards, have at it; if a state wants to establish fishing limits, have at it; etc., but when it comes to God-given human rights, especially after an individual has paid the debt for wrongs established by a legal system, the US system should apply to all citizens. Otherwise we might even ask as to what benefit is it being a US citizen if the state is going to trample on our rights to ‘life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness’? All US citizens should have the same rights. For a state to continue adding on restrictions after a ‘debt’ is paid is just plain wrong.
On the heels of these comments, I just want to mention that when I first sat with my probation officer, who knew every detail of my offense, he said to me (and I quote), “I believe that once every one has paid their debt, they deserve a second chance.” He was the best. Unfortunately. he was promoted and left my PO office, and my new PO was a woman. She was great with me but Enough said.
Trying to heal:
I know what you are saying about the PO. My last PO (for 2 1/2 years) was named Kermit.
(insert “frog jokes” here)
He was, by far, the best PO I have ever had. When we sat down for our first talk he stated to me.
80% of the people I see did their crime, and will do their crime again. And are guilty.
18% of the people I see are on the fence with me. Their file has holes in it as to whether they actually DID the crime, or not.
THE FINAL 2%, you fall into. Where the system failed them. They were set-up and were unable to provide ANY defense. They are not guilty.
I had a couple of times where I had violated my “conditions”. One was a friend was in the process of committing suicide and she called me to say good bye. I went to her, in the next county and got there to save her life.
I called Kermit, told him what happened and where do I turn myself in…
He told me that he cant violate someone who just saved another persons life.
I have been off paper since 2000. Kermit still comes by to chat; I consider him a friend who helped me thru a real tough time in my life.
Great story Sean. Congratulations on your success. I don’t believe the number is that low, honestly. Only 2%. In my SO group, there were 4 of us. I will stand on the belief that 3 of the 4 of us will never re-offend, especially me. Made a HUGE mistake in a difficult period of life. I have been successfully pulled myself through that with the help and commitment of some great family, friends, and wonderful, honest, in your face counselors. I see where I went wrong and am aware to avoid that in the future. Live for my family, myself. Now, just to find that all elusive job to help me live. (eye roll).
I’m proud of you Sean. Proud of all of us who fight for our rights, our lives, our families futures. We didn’t just do this to ourselves, we brought a whole lot of people with us. My poor neighbors.
Be blessed. Stay blessed.
Now at this time yes
OR the Florida courts could determine that the mandatory minimum supervision is punishment for a new and distinct crime of violating the registration statutes which are not additional punishment, but merely carry criminal penalties. Wouldn’t be the first time.
Ok, So with all these “OTHER” States declaring the “MANY” parts of “The Registery”, WHY ON EARTH ARE WE STILL BEING SUBJECTED TO THESE ILLEGAL CONDITIONS AND “LAWS” ?????, And, No I’m not yelling at anyone on here !!! Just yelling Because I’m Flabbergasted at how our “Government” works !!!, Some states can find that things are absolutely ILLEGAL and remove those “Conditions” from our requirements !!!!, But other states (Florida for sure) continues to FORCE these ILLEGAL laws on us !!!???????. If this is a “Federal” law that has been found “Illegal”, Then WHY won’t the “Government” FORCE “ALL” states to follow their findings ???.
Please excuse me if this is already addressed. Is this already on the agenda?
Part of the ex post facto challenge.
Does this also apply to changes rules, such as from 5 days to 3? Just a thought. When I agreed to the plea, wasn’t it based on the rules set forth at that time. I’m assuming somewhere it must say, rules subject to change with little notice.
These will all be argued as part of the ex post facto challenge.
The registration statute has been modified (to become harsher and more onerous) practically every year since 1997.
ALMOST ALL of the draconian restrictions were statutorily mandated special conditions of probation in 1997. The requirement that you inform your college that you are a registered offender was one of the first “new” requirements that I was subject to after my plea in June of 2000. I dropped out of the masters program that Was enrolled in because of that. We are all still wondering how the State of Florida managed to “permit” counties and municipalities to apply residency restrictions to people convicted prior to 2004-2005 who were off probation when the state has acknowledged that it can’t do that to the very same people. Oh, wait. they said that they CHOSE not to do that, right?