South Carolina Supreme Court rules that lifetime placement on the sex offender registry is unconstitutional
The S.C. Supreme Court has ruled the state’s lifetime requirement to register as a sex offender is unconstitutional and those who demonstrate a low risk of re offending may have their names purged with a judge’s permission.
You can read the Court’s opinion here: https://www.sccourts.org/opinions/HTMLFiles/SC/28033.pdf
https://law.justia.com/cases/south-carolina/supreme-court/2021/28033.html
Watch oral arguments here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTPq69kGgiE
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ok now THIS is good news. Is SC part of our district???
Let’s party like it’s 1989 (1999 had a registry, 1989 didn’t lol)
SC is NOT part of our Federal District and this is a State Supreme Court case but it’s HUGELY persuasive.
There are no hugely persuasive cases involving sex offenders in less the key says that they can take us out in the town square and shoot us. .(sarcasm font)
So, you need the permission of a judge to be removed based on a finding of low risk? I don’t see this as a win because of my experience with judges deeming anyone convicted of a sex offender as high risk.
Exactly what I was thinking. After Disantis ruling to Summarily dismiss all SO’s application for rights restoration, I would think the judges will take his example and just dismiss all applications for removal from the registry, at least in Florida claiming all sex offenders are dangerous forever.
I agree with you. Now the cabal of judges will simply rule ALL are high risk.
My experience with judges is that they assume a former sex offender (like any offender) to be low risk unless the prosecutor has successfully demonstrated otherwise.
Again, that’s just my personal experience. Different judges are different.
My personal impression is that a judge who would opine simply that “the petitioner is high risk because he has a sex offense on his record” is likely a dim bulb, or the petitioner’s attorney is bad.
So which supreme court justices effectively took judicial notice the “facts” that sex offenders, especially ones who prey on children, are always going to be high risk? And how about the ones that said that all of these burdens placed on us are merely “ministerial” and not punishment?
a registrant
Unless otherwise noted, the public can sit in on hearings, sentencing etc. I have personally sat in on cases (To further my understanding and get a feeling for what judges are more understanding)
Certain judges lean more on what the prosecution is serving for lunch and some are more open minded and take both sides into consideration. I won’t name the judge that sentenced me, but I would not wish her on Charles Manson, that is how bad she was. Even my laywer was in tears and had to throw up in the hallway after my sentencing.
And although it took me doing almost half of my sentence to win an appeal, the charges were not disputed but the sentencing. My lawyer had the foresight to wait for another judge to be seated in her place before proceeding a 3rd time. That new judge is now on the Florida Supreme court. Wish I could get before him with my registry challenge, but that is not the way it works.
Good opinion, but still maddening that they refuse to address the regulatory or punitive issue. That appellate courts seem to go out of their way to avoid that question indicates (to me, at least) that they’re running out of ways to find the registry regulatory and, like most superior court judges, find procedural ways to avoid the issue so they don’t have to make rulings they don’t like.
Dustin
Did you actually read it? The judge ruled and used the exact words that lifetime registration is considered punitive. Click the link and read the ruling. That is HUGE bud
Lifetime registration without due process was ruled punitive, not registration itself. Nor is it new – I’m pretty sure the Doe v. Snyder and Millard v. Rankin courts came to the same conclusion.
Legislatures get around such rulings by narrowing the scope of which offenses can de-register and create a procedure that is near impossible to meet even with a lawyer (which most registrants can’t afford). Then they’ll change it all over again when someone actually does meet their ridiculous requirements to ensure no one else can.
Until the registry itself is found punitive – which everyone on earth, including judges, already know – we’re just going to keep running around in the same circles. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think this is a significant victory.
Dustin
They proved they can get away with anything when they retroactived my ass. My charge was from 1991. Was arrested in 1992, sentenced in 1993. No registry was around and no mention by judge or prosecutor. Got released to probation in 1997, same year registry started in Florida. The day I was released I had to report directly to the registration office or be Beheaded by his Royal majesty the King Lawton Chiles, a Democrat Governor.
Where was mine and others chance to bargin? To plea for a lighter sentence? Why different rules for different people at different times? Why applied retroactively without any recourse? Why are people arrested currently able to avoid the registry with permission of the judge but I am on it for life?
So many questions and NOT a single answer.
Link that works
https://law.justia.com/cases/south-carolina/supreme-court/2021/28033.html
It’s impossible to understate how big of a ruling that is…
btw – the link to the pdf isn’t working.
Whoa! After reading the news about Flagler County, this seems to be to good to be true.
What news about Flagler County?