Sex Offender Registration: Is It Punishment?
Sex offender registration statutes are fairly recent, however, and some registered sex offenders have argued that they should not have to register with FDLE because they committed their crimes before the sex offender statute was passed into law in the 1990's. What difference does that make you might ask? There is a concept in the law called ex post facto which means that a law cannot ordinarily punish conduct that was committed before that law went into effect. For example, if someone committed a sex crime in 1990 but the sex offender registration did not go into effect until 1993, such a person might well argue that he should not have to register as a sex offender because he committed his crime before the sex offender registration law went into effect.
Although I personally find this argument to be persuasive, the United States Supreme Court does not. In the case of Smith v. Doe, the High Court ruled that Alaska's sex-offender registration statute did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution because the Alaska State Legislature's intention in passing that particular law was not to punish sex offenders but rather to create a "civil, nonpunitive regime."
Since Smith v. Doe was decided in 2003, several Florida appellate courts have cited to that particular case in ruling that Florida sex offenders must also register with FDLE even if the crimes for which they were convicted were committed before the Florida sex-offender registration law went into effect.
In spite of all these cases to the contrary, Florida sex offender registration requirements still seem like punishment to me.
In 1986, I was convicted of kidnapping a 2 day old infant.I suffered from severe depression at the time of the incident, the child was returned unharmed, no sexual intent, no accusation, no charges of such. Upon serving out my sentence in 2001, I was forced to register for life as a sexual predator, even though I had been out on parole 2x without incident and had never been assessed as a sexual offender. I was violated for a bad check, and chose to serve out the sentence. Since release, I've had my life threatened, lost housing, no employment. I'm told by everyone that I would not be on the site if I had not raped someone's child. I often feel like committing suicide to stop the harassment. Police will not protect me, they tell the neighbors I'm a sex offender.
Intent of the law should not be the basis for determination. Compare the definition of Probation in Florida to Sex Offender Registration requirements. A sex offender in Florida is required to re-register a minimum of 1 time per year or 2 times for some offenders and 4 times for others. At least once a year an officer must physically verify the offenders address. An offender can not change addresses and soon employment without reporting this information to the appropriate authorities. Again, compare the definitions of probation and the similarities between the two. That perhaps is the next best legal argument.
Many professionals have spoken to intent of laws and there actual effect on society and those whom the laws are targeting.
Today, laws are being enacted with the intent of protecting society and reducing sexual offences withing the community. These laws cast to the side all scientific evidence which is presented in great amounts which prove the laws are a failure on every level at reducing incidence of sex crimes, and protecting society. The effect of these laws is multifaceted. Cost of implementation and enforcement of laws which bear no fruit is high. Collateral damage to the children and other family members of the retroactively applied laws, which are unconstitutional, is very high. These laws effectively banish the offender and his whole family once on the registry. And often times for a crime committed 20, 30 years ago with no new crime.
Once honest, valid members of society, now become infamaous without having committed a new crime. Congressman Scott, (Video www.cfcamerica.org ) Admitted that once a person is on the registry, their life is over. These laws need to administer justice to each individual. Presently they do not. Blanket laws which sweep up thousands and ruing so many lives at a huge cost to the tax payers. Insanity.
Question.
Alaska ruled the retroactive application of the sex offender registry is unconstitutional and thus, all who committed their crimes before the rule was in effect, were taken off the registry and do not have to register.
My question,
If the state says you do not have to register due to the state constitution.. where does that leve you as far as the Federal SORNA, AWA?
Someone said once the date for compliance is past, U.S. Martials will be going to the states and arresting or forcing those who have not registered with the state to have to register with the FEDS or face prison.
The question. If your state rules the registy unconstitutional in Retroactive application, does the Federal Government have precedence over the state? If so, where exactly would one register if not with the state? info@cfcamerica.org Please address this question. Please cite law, if you can.
Attorney Chapman's response:
Your question has to do with what is called the doctrine of federalism. To learn more about this doctrine, go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
I found at least one scholarly article dealing with your question that you can find at:
http://www.thefacultylounge.org/2009/06/commandeering-state-constitutions-sex-offender-registration-sorna-and-the-tenth-amendment.html
I hope you find this information helpful.