Sex Offender Registration Removal and a New Florida Case

Posted on August 18, 2009 by Ron Chapman

       Florida law provides that under certain circumstances an individual may have his name removed from the sex offender or sexual predator registry.  However, before that can occur, the judge deciding the matter must determine that removal of the person's name will not conflict with federal law.

 

        In a recent case called Miller v. State of Florida, a judge denied Mr. Miller's request to have his name removed from the sex offender registry because it conflicted with a federal law commonly known as the Adam Walsh Act.  More specifically, the judge found that the Adam Walsh Act permits only persons who have been convicted of consensual sexual activity to be exempt from registering as sex offenders.  Because Mr. Miller was unable to prove that the sexual activity that he was convicted of was consensual, the trial judge refused to order the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to remove Miller's name from the sex offender registry.

 

          In response, Miller made three arguments:  

          1.  The crime that he pled guilty to (lewd or lascivious battery), does not require proof that the sexual act was not consensual;

 

          2.  The Florida law that permits an individual to have his name removed from the sex offender registry does not explicitly require that the crime in question involve consensual conduct; and

 

          3.  The sex act that occurred between Miller and the victim in his case was, in fact, consensual.

 

          On appeal, Florida's Fifth District Court of Appeal rejected each of these arguments.  From now on, therefore, one of the things that a person trying to get his name removed from Florida's sex offender registry will have to prove is that the sexual activity he was convicted of was consensual in nature.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Registered Sex Offenders: Suing to Find a Place to Live

Posted on July 14, 2009 by Ron Chapman

          It seems that the thorny issue of where registered sex offenders should be allowed to live just won't go away.  In 2007, I wrote an article entitled "Sex Offenders:  Where Can They Live?," and in 2008 I wrote an article entitled "Where Can You Live in Florida if You Are a Registered Sex Offender?"  Palm Beach Post staff writer John Lantigua has now written an article entitled "Registered sex offenders:  Where can they live?"

 

          In his article, Mr. Lantigua reports that just last week the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida sued Miami-Dade County over an ordinance that prohibits individuals convicted of sex crimes involving minors from living within 2,500 feet of such places as schools, playgrounds, and school bus stops.  According to the article, however, the ACLU is not suing out of a concern for the safety of those sex offenders living under a bridge but rather out of a concern for the safety of the general public.

 

          In that regard, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida is quoted as saying that "[p]eople have to realize that making them live under that bridge has created a more dangerous situation.  Because of the conditions, some of these individuals are absconding, evading supervision.  These ordinances interfere with the Department of Corrections' ability to keep track of them.  This is a crisis situation."

 

          Apparently, the Florida Department of Corrections--the agency in charge of supervising sex offenders--agrees.  A spokesperson for that agency is quoted as saying that "[o]ur concern is for public safety.  If they are homeless there is more of a chance they will abscond.  There are already 91 homeless offenders around the state, mostly in South Florida, and the problem is getting bigger."

 

          When two unlikely bedfellows such as the ACLU and the Florida Department of Corrections agree on something as serious as where registered sex offenders should be allowed to live, perhaps it's time to change the law.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Sex Offenders: Where Can They Live?

Posted on December 1, 2007 by Ron Chapman

Where can convicted sex offenders live?  This is becoming an increasing problem as laws are continually being passed that limit where convicted sex offenders can live.  For instance, in Florida, persons convicted of certain sex offenses are not permitted to live within 1,000 feet of any school, day care center, park, or playground. 

The following story appears on the blog entitled Sex Offender Issues and vividly describes the plight of a sex offender who lives in Tampa and who is trying to find a place to live:

As he left prison this month, a convicted sex offender named Jose Valido gave officials the Tampa address where he planned to live while he served his probation. But the house was too close to a school and a day care, and against the rules.

So what became Valido's official, state-approved residence?

A spot downtown under Tampa's Selmon Crosstown Expressway, where his probation officer could stop by a particular underpass at night to be sure he wasn't busting curfew.

Valido wasn't the only one with an official outdoor address approved by a probation officer. Another sex offender already lived at the Crosstown. Men have resided similarly under Miami's Julia Tuttle Causeway because they had nowhere else to legally go.

We have men officially living under bridges. To borrow the words of the judge in the Valido case, what country is this?

Sex offenders are our modern lepers, and no, I don't want them living next door to me, either.

Some politicians are only too happy to exploit our trepidation. We push them out; a couple of towns ban them completely. An apartment building that was within the rules suddenly isn't when the city approves a day care next door. Men crowd into the few boarding houses that make the cut.

A few end up under an expressway or a bridge.

Valido, 54, is on probation after six years and nine months in prison. He pleaded guilty to sexual battery of a child. The file detailing the charges paints a picture of a truly vile character. He planned to live at his brother's house, but it was within 1,000 feet of an elementary school and a day care. "He was told he couldn't live there, so he had to go live under a bridge," his lawyer told a judge this week. According to the Department of Corrections, a probation officer told Valido about the Crosstown option, saying another sex offender living there could give him directions.

Valido was charged with violating curfew when the probation officer who showed up to check on him didn't find him. His lawyer said he had been threatened by people there because he had money.

Hillsborough Circuit Judge Dan Perry - who questioned how he could violate the man's probation for not being under an expressway - put the case on hold while Valido's lawyer tries to put him with family in Miami.

"Find him a place," the judge said.

Well, boo hoo for Valido and his ilk, some people are saying about now.

Me, I'm of the aren't-we-better-than-this school. But if the idea of these people living under a bridge causes you no heartburn whatsoever on grounds of morality or humanity, consider this: It sure makes it harder to hold a job. It puts people closer to drugs and disconnection and the possibility of crime. Police do not want these men to melt into the transient world unmonitored. Wouldn't we be better off with offenders paying rent at designated, appropriately located apartments or trailer parks?

DOC spokeswoman Jo Ellyn Rackleff said a bridge is not a good alternative, but it's better than not knowing where offenders are. So far this has happened only in Miami and Tampa, but the lack of appropriate housing grows. "We keep saying there may be no places left but under overpasses," says Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender Bob Dillinger.

And to repeat the judge: What country is this?

It is because of situations like this that I, as a Florida criminal lawyer, am so reluctant to have my clients designated as sexual offenders or sexual predators.  Such designations can sometimes be avoided by simply having the client plea to some other offense (such as felony battery) which does not require that the client be labeled a sex offender.

 

Florida sex offense attorney Ronald Chapman has been representing people accused of committing sex crimes in Florida since 1990. You can read more about Mr. Chapman’s experience as a Florida sex crimes lawyer as well as review news articles about some of his cases. Some of the types of cases and issues that Mr. Chapman has handled since 1990 include:

 

• Death Penalty Cases
• Assault and Battery Cases
• DUI Cases
• Drug Cases
• Sex Crimes Cases
• Sealing & Expunging Criminal Records
• Bond|Bail
• Mistaken Identification and Wrongful Conviction
• Police Interrogations
• Sentencing  
Tags: ,