Order reopening Clements – Will residency restrictions tip the scales?
Last month we reported that Louis Clements won his appeal in the 11th Circuit. The Appellate court kicked the case back to the trial court, finding that the court didn’t properly consider whether sex offender residency restrictions are severe enough to constitute someone to be “in custody” for purposes of a Habeas Corpus petition.
Today, the Middle District Court entered an order vacating it’s dismissal and reopening the case. “The parties have through November 14, 2025, to conduct any necessary research or discovery on the restrictions and reporting requirements for Florida sex offenders. Within THIRTY (30) DAYS thereafter, Respondent shall brief the Court on whether Florida’s sex offender rules—the residency restrictions combined with the registration and reporting requirements—render a petitioner “in custody” for habeas purposes, even when the petitioner is no longer in physical custody.”
FAC has been in touch with attorneys for Clements and offered our support of this case. We may call upon members impacted by residency restrictions to provide declarations.
You can read the order below:
Clements – Order reopening
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Can we please also reach out to anyone who has been told they would not be released from incarceration until an “approved” housing arrangement was made? That happened in my husband’s case. I was told by his CO at the prison if no approved housing was set up for him at his release date he would be held in custody until such time proper residency was arranged and confirmed by them. I was also told that trying to get in touch with his PO 3 months in advance of his release was “too soon”. Given the restrictions and requirements there is no way 3 months planning time is too soon.
We can do anything we have the resources to get done. Right now we have a desperate lack of volunteers. We posted something on the top of the website asking for volunteers for media, just so we could get help posting information and responding to these comments, but people are not stepping up.
More residency restrictions (paid article) https://www.palatkadailynews.com/local-news/sex-offender-residence-law-gets-1st-county-approval
Even fewer places to live in Putnam county
I would summit it to Clements lawyer.
I’m not surprised to see this after what that sheriff did earlier this year:
Putnam County Sheriff’s Office: ‘Cesspool of sex offenders’ cleared out of local trailer park
February 28, 2025 at 9:38 p.m. UTC
By ActionNewsJax.com News Staff
PUTNAM COUNTY, Fla. — A “cesspool of sex offenders” was cleared out of a Palatka trailer park on Friday afternoon, according to Putnam County Sheriff Gator DeLoach.
On a Facebook Live, DeLoach said more than 22 convicted predators and sex offenders living in the area were cleared out.
The trailer park, located at 3600 Balsam Street, was turned into what DeLoach referred to as a “predator’s paradise.”
23 registered offenders and predators have this location listed as their address, according to Florida’s Sexual Offenders and Predators Search.
According to the sheriff, the trailer park is located in an area where there are often children. There is a volunteer fire department with a youth program and bus stop close by.
“We heard your cries. We heard your screams on social media,” DeLoach said in the Live.
DeLoach said the sheriff’s office believes the trailer park was acquired in December by an “unscrupulous person” who lives outside Putnam County jurisdiction.
There were 14 homes. However, all but three have now been condemned, according to the sheriff.
The sheriff’s office is taking a “holistic approach” to shutting down the park.
The Putnam County Sheriff’s Office has enlisted the help of the PCSO Criminal Investigation Bureau, patrol deputies, sex offender compliance specialists, probation and parole officers, Putnam County Code Enforcement, and the Putnam County Health Department, according to DeLoach.
DeLoach said they will continue to “aggressively” pursue condemning the final three trailers.
The sheriff said no one is allowed inside the homes unless they are doing licensed work.
“Not in Putnam County and over my dead body are we ever going to let Putnam County become a sanctuary for these kinds of individuals,” DeLoach said.
I’d like to see FAC take on Homer “Gator” DeLoach (DeROACH)
So what does it mean if the court finds in favor of Clements.
Residency Restrictions = Confinement, Confinement = Punishment
If residency restrictions made part of the registration scheme are deemed punishment, the registry = punishment and is subject to Ex Post Facto constitutional protection.
Does that mean the entire registry is abolished?
It does not
Ok So FAC-3. Thank you for laymen’s term explanation. So basically if the Lower court agrees with Clements, and the 11th Circuit doesn’t mess it up then the Does case should be a wrap?
We are required to go in to the sheriff’s office at various times during the year under penalty of felony prosecution.
During such time, we are required to surrender custody of ourselves.
We do not have the ability to refuse to appear. Therefore, we are under sanction. We are in custody for all intents and purposes.
Furthermore, we do not have the right to remain silent during these forced interrogations! If we remain silent, we will be charged with failure to register!
They have suspended habeas corpus and the right to refuse to incriminate oneself, and the right to remain silent
I THINK LIVING IN THE CITY OF ST. CLOUD IS 100% OFF LIMITS OR CLOSE TO IT!
it’s Amazing that when politicians want to screw people over and infringe on peoples rights the corts are quick to have a hearing to allow these laws to hold up but let the people it affects want to challenge the law it takes years and years if it all.
ohh yea gee i almost forgot the courts and legal system that is *cough fairer then none is bought and paid for by our goverment. not sure how it can not be bias when our own goverment is paying these people.
Of course Habeas Courpus should be granted! All of the conditions combined with the residency restrictions create a defacto statutory lifetime probationary sentence on registrants; with any violation of such “conditions”; are met with severe deprivation of liberty.
In most cases against de facto life violates the states constitution when it says the offender “shall” be returned to status quo after he or she has served their time. The word shall is not any discretionary word In our constitutions. It demands compliance.
What are you referring to? If you say “most cases”, can you please cite to one that states one “shall” be returned to status quo.