Some out-of-state decisions shed hope – while others don't.

While Florida continues down an irrational path, some states have come out with opinions recently that have shown a bit more reasonableness when it comes to sex offender management and probation terms.

 

This past Friday, the Vermont Supreme Court issued an opinion removing internet restrictions (among others) from the standard conditions of probation.  The court held that a condition that poses a ban on a computer or the Internet “constitutes a ‘greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary to deter illegal conduct and protect the public.’

 

“We do not see a sufficient justification for such a sweeping restriction, which would render nearly all the activities of life incalculably difficult in the modern age,” Associate Justice John Dooley wrote in the decision.

 

You can read the full decision here: http://law.justia.com/cases/vermont/supreme-court/2016/2016-vt-47.html

 

The State of Kansas ALMOST held that sex offender restrictions could not be applied retroactively. In fact, at the same time, the State issued 4 opinions; 3 ruling against retroactive application of restrictions and one which subsequently over-ruled the prior three.

 

How can that happen, you ask? The first three were heard in 2014 and the last one, more recently. A new judge, Caleb Stagell was added to the court afterwards and his decision was contrary to the prior three decisions, which were voted on 4-3. With Stagell’s vote shifting the decision to 3-4 (in favor of retroactive application), it overruled the first three decisions and left Kansas free to extend 10 year registration requirements to 25 (or life).

 

The state of Pennsylvania is also taking up this same challenge (read more here) with plaintiff’s arguing; how can they be required NOW to register for life, when a decade ago (at the time of their conviction) they were not required to do so. Surprisingly, the PA supreme court has agreed to hear that case.