Watch where you step! Proximity ordinances create trip wires for registrants.
A recent arrest in Melbourne underscores how Brevard County’s restrictive proximity ordinance creates a minefield for registrants who are simply trying to go about their daily lives. According to reports, a 46-year-old man was arrested around 9 p.m. after walking through the parking lot of Melbourne High School — long after the school was closed and deserted. Police said the man, who has an offense dating back more than 15 years, admitted he was a registrant but explained he was merely taking a shortcut to the sidewalk before it started to rain. Nevertheless, he was charged with violating Brevard County Ordinance 74-102, which prohibits registrants from being within 1,000 feet of schools, parks, playgrounds, and daycares.
What’s troubling is that this arrest took place at night, when no students or staff were present. Yet the ordinance applies 24 hours a day, seven days a week, regardless of whether children are anywhere nearby. It also covers the areas within 1000 feet of schools, parks, playgrounds and daycares, requiring persons to know what path is at least 1000 feet away from the property lines. This creates a situation where registrants must constantly guess whether they’ve unknowingly stepped into one of countless overlapping 1,000-foot buffer zones that surround nearly every public space in the county. There are no signs marking these invisible boundaries. A person could be in compliance one moment and in violation the next, without ever realizing it.
This is not public safety — it’s entrapment by geography. When ordinances are written so broadly that even crossing a parking lot at night becomes a criminal act, we have to ask whether the goal is truly protecting the public or perpetuating punishment. The individual in this case has long since completed his sentence and is trying to stay compliant, yet he continues to get caught up in technical violations that serve no rehabilitative or protective purpose.
We call on Sheriffs and law enforcement agencies across Florida — particularly in counties with proximity ordinances — to exercise discretion and apply common sense. Arresting someone for taking a shortcut through an empty school parking lot late at night serves no one. It wastes law enforcement resources, destabilizes individuals who are already under intense supervision, and does nothing to make our communities safer.
It’s time for a more rational, evidence-based approach — one that recognizes that true safety comes from stability, not from criminalizing geography or punishing people for where they happen to step.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
James, I agree with you 100%, this guy should never walk through a school parking lot, I wouldn’t. However, he was still in violation walking on the sidewalk outside school grounds if within 1000ft.
Plus, some of the things you did to protect yourself could have gotten you arrested. State law has no provisions that I know of for going onto school grounds other than picking up/dropping off your own children or grandchildren. The school resource officer could have arrested you on the spot if he was an A**hole, and prosecutors wouldn’t have thought twice about convicting you (easy win boosting their win/loss record which is most prosecutors #1 priority, not justice).
I’ve gotten to the point someone else mentioned, scared to go just about anywhere anymore.
State law is more nuanced than that:
https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0856/Sections/0856.022.html
I seem to be the only one with this viewpoint however I still hold to my views. Yes the proximity ordinance is unconstitutional however that PFR that crossed onto school property knowingly is still at fault. Most of us forced to register do everything we can to avoid places that could land us in jail. We know that schools are the number one place to avoid at all costs.
When my kids were in school I went to the actual school board and obtained written permission to be on school grounds for pick up and drop off. I also met with the resource officers at the school and called them directly to meet me at the door and escort me to the office when I had to enter the school for any reason.
This pro-action on my part removed any possible incursions. Yes it was a headache however it protected me. It doesn’t matter what time of day it is nor does it matter if school is open or not. What matters is that we already know that society is against us and the police will do everything that they can to hem us up on charges.
Unless a PFR is trying to get arrested in order to challenge the constitutionality of a registration punitive law they are a complete idiot if they do not use hyper-vigilance to ensure that they are safe.
The registrant that violated this proximity ordinance should have known better and now has caused problems for the rest of us as LEO will now be harsher on anyone within the exclusion zones. Be advised it will not be long before FLOCK cameras using facial recognition start monitoring these zones. once this happens a PFR that unknowingly walks a foot out of line will suffer because of people like this arrestee.
Sorry if my comment is not popular but wake up people and keep your noses clean while we try to fight the registries and ordinances in court. Don’t make it more difficult on the rest of us by being stupid.
you already know the answer.. it serves it’s purpose perfectly.. Only fools think the actual purpose ever was protection or security… It’s always been deflection, shaming, and punishment.. peanuts and circuses..
I’m getting so scared, I almost don’t want to go out anymore for fear I’m gonna cross one of those imaginary lines…
I don’t see how this ordinance, which imposes virtual house arrest on registrants, could possibly pass any level of constitutional scrutiny. Not allowing someone to walk near a closed school at night when passing by for lawful purposes is not rationally related to any government interest (below the lowest level of scrutiny for a criminal law, which requires criminal laws to be rationally related to a compelling government interest). What is the government interest in not allowing a citizen to peaceably pass by a closed school en route home, to work, etc.?
This is a deprivation of liberty, as well as an infringement on the right to travel, without due process of law, and it’s certainly an ex post facto law if imposed retroactively. Has the 5th DCA ruled on the constitutionality of this law?
I want to know if the fine print of the law makes this applicable to those who have a minor involved in their conviction or just all PFRs regardless. Laws usually have to be tailored in such instances where those with minors involved usually are bound by this especially but are until challenged wide open.
not one registry in the country ever could pass constitutional muster ..(spoiler alert) If registrys were legal and worked as deterrents they would have registrys for every crime.. The s3x offender registry is 30 years old and still all alone because it’s the only crime everyone has agreed to “look the other way” on and not say the quiet part out loud .
Make them provide a map of the boundaries and put signs up of where boundaries exist. You cannot follow the law if one is not provided the boundaries to do so. Not saying they did not know the law, but t arrest one who is crossing the parking lot to avoid the oncoming rain between two sidewalks is about petty as it gets. Shows the small mindedness of FLA LE, laws, and the elected officials who believe this is best.