Third Lawsuit Filed This Month Challenging Florida Sex Offender Registry

Another federal lawsuit has been filed challenging the Florida sex offender registry. This one filed in the Middle District of Florida and assigned case number D-FLM-6-18-CV-001731-001.

This suit represents the third constitutional challenge to the state’s sex offender registry filed this month (actually, the second was filed last month and the State removed it to Federal Court this month).

The next couple of months will be very interesting!


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

50 thoughts on “Third Lawsuit Filed This Month Challenging Florida Sex Offender Registry

  • October 16, 2018

    The seem similar. It will be interesting what would happen if one Federal court favors us and the other does not.

    Reply
    • October 16, 2018

      @ Bobby: If there are conflicting rulings … and if there are enough of them …. they will likely catch the attention of SCOTUS. SCOTUS would then, hopefully, seek a case requesting Cert. that offers them good, clearly-deliniated arguments to rule on.

      Reply
      • October 16, 2018

        These are in the Florida District Courts. Before it goes to the SCOTUS it would go to the 11th Circuit Appellate Court, which has no court to conflict with other than another circuit’s.

        Reply
  • October 16, 2018

    Florida is on a roll !! Loving it !

    Reply
    • October 16, 2018

      Yes Debbie let us all pray that one of the three if not all three squash this crap once and for all

      Reply
      • October 16, 2018

        I’m with you Joseph. I really hope so!

        Reply
  • October 16, 2018

    So there just happens to be 3 different lawsuits, with the case involving John Does 1-5 being the Ex post facto case that Florida Action Committee is specifically behind, correct? 2 are in Miami, 1 in Orlando all with the Federal District court. Just making sure i got this all straight. The three cases for anyone who wants to read them:

    https://floridaactioncommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Does-v-Bradshaw-ET-AL.pdf

    https://floridaactioncommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Does-v-Swearingen-Complaint.pdf

    file:///C:/Users/rpsab/OneDrive/Documents/middledistrict.pdf

    Reply
    • October 16, 2018

      Correct – Does v. Swearingen is FACs.
      Doe v. Bradshaw was removed from the State Court by the government. It’s as applied to one Plaintiff who paid his own attorney to file on his behalf. We’ve spoken to Cindy D’Agostino, that attorney, and we will be collaborating.
      The third case, filed yesterday, in the Middle District is the Estes-Hightower case. We reached out to their FL attorney with some concerns about their complaint. He did reply and apparently they will be amending it.

      Reply
      • October 16, 2018

        Thank you, FAC, for gaining their cooperation, making their filing better, and generally keeping it all under control.

        Reply
      • October 16, 2018

        Yeah, that Middle District complaint is a bit of a mess. 😉

        Reply
        • October 16, 2018

          We’ve offered to help them out. I hope they take us up on it. At the end of the day, we want ALL to win – we just don’t want anything less than good out there that can potentially create bad precedent.

          Reply
          • October 16, 2018

            Regarding bad precedent, here’s a question that’s keeping me up at night.

            If the law firm does not accept the free help, how likely is it that this third suit will be counterproductive and muck things up?

            Because I am really hoping that Estes-Hightower has an open mind and put any ego considerations aside. They would be doing their clients a favor, IMO.

          • October 16, 2018

            Went back and forth with their Florida local counsel and he was actually OK.

          • October 16, 2018

            That is a relief. If people on the same side are listening to one another, what more can we ask? 🙂

          • October 17, 2018

            ” we just don’t want anything less than good out there that can potentially create bad precedent. ”

            I agree, if you’re going to do something and put work into it – any type of work, then do good work and go all out, and nothing half baked. Nothing bothers me more than wasted energy because of no effort. For that I just won’t even bother. Speaking in general in any type of work or project, not just about this.

  • October 15, 2018

    Thanks FAC for the info. Does anyone know what judge is assigned to this case? Some judges in the Middle District of Florida, particularly the Orlando Division (i.e. home to some of the most influential theme parks in the country) have given harsh sentences in child porn cases. Also the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the U.S. Probation Office here have a history of harsh treatment of sex offenders. So it would be great to some favorable ruling(s) from an unbiased judge in the Orlando Division…if one can be found.

    Reply
    • October 16, 2018

      Carlos E. Mendoza, presiding

      The AUSA won’t be handling it because this is a Civil Suit and the State will have their own attorneys handling it.

      Reply
      • October 17, 2018

        Here is a link for information about Judge Mendoza. Notably, the link says he has replaced Judge Antoon but that’s not entirely correct since Antoon is still on the bench and he is known to be harsh on sex offenders and make up facts that arent part of the record. Maybe Mendoza, a much younger judge, will be more fair.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Eduardo_Mendoza

        Reply
    • October 16, 2018

      yeah Tim is right Orlando very harsh district They were handling out long sentences like Santa does candy canes…. I caught a 20 year sentence there There is a Judge I think he still there Judge Stone They had him under investigation The inmates @ 33rd street County Jail were calling him the “Time Machine” He would not give less then 15 years…. The State Attorney would offer deals like 5 yrs but the judge went beyond that

      Reply
  • October 15, 2018

    This suit has over 60 plaintiffs in the complaint, I.E, there is a LOT of money behind the suit…Hoping for the best on all the suits.

    Reply
    • October 16, 2018

      Id like to know that as well. I’m sure FAC will release more info about all three cases and their differences if any at some point.

      Reply
  • October 15, 2018

    Could you provide a link so I can read this. I know you provided a case # but I dont know how to find it… Any help??
    Oh…..
    As I struggle to stand and try to take a breath, I try to burst out in song “GOD BLESS AMERICA!!”

    Reply
    • October 15, 2018

      We will add more details shortly

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *