QUESTION
Why are sex offender laws not a violation of ex post facto?
Asked on May 01st, 2011 on Criminal Law - California
More details to this question:
Has the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on these issues, and where can I obtain a copy of their rulings regarding this?
8 ANSWERS
Adoptions Attorney serving Lansing, MI
at
Austin Legal Services, PLC
Update Your Profile
An ex post facto law punishes someone with penalties that were not prescribed at the time of their conviction. For example, if someone was convicted of a sex offense in 1973 (well before the Sex Offender Registration Act) the courts can not now come back and make that person register under the act because the laws for the registry did not exist at the time. Now when a person is convicted, the law prescribes such punishment so they are not a true ex post facto law.
Answered on Aug 31st, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Criminal Law Attorney serving Howell, MI
at
Law Offices of Jules N. Fiani
Update Your Profile
You can get a copy of it from a law library. If you hire an attorney such as myself, the attorney can research this issue and create a report for you on this matter.
Answered on May 05th, 2011 at 10:07 AM
Personal Injury Attorney serving New Orleans, LA
at
Bloom Legal LLC
Update Your Profile
Ex post facto is a complex legal concept that can apply in various manners. The term literally means "from after the action" so it is important to note that ex post facto law can both: - criminalize actions that were legal when committed and - decriminalize certain acts or alleviate possible punishments retroactively If your question is relating to the addition of punishments to sex offenders who committed crimes that were not explicitly punishable at the time, it is important to note that aspects of ex post facto law can enhance punishments.
Answered on May 05th, 2011 at 9:08 AM
Criminal Attorney serving Bellingham, WA
at
Andrew Subin Attorney at Law
Update Your Profile
The rationale is because sex offender registration is not "punishment." There are numerous state and federal cases addressing this issue.
Answered on May 04th, 2011 at 10:04 AM
Criminal Law Attorney serving Oakland, CA
at
Dennis Roberts A Professional Corporation
Update Your Profile
What are you talking about. Ex post facto means a prosecution of a new law on a case that took place before the new law. ie. you molest a child - there is no law prohibiting that conduct - then the legislature decides to pass a statute prohibiting child molestation. That's ex post facto.
Answered on May 03rd, 2011 at 12:26 PM
Simon Brian Purnell
The answer is a long and tortured tour of criminal procedure and the limitation of our Constitution/bill of rights. If you want a brief look at how the US Supreme Court addressed the issue in the past few years, start with a case styled Carr v US. It addressed the unconstitutional nature of applying SORNA (the federal sex offender registration statute) to pre-enactment unregistered travel. For a more detailed analysis of your situation, feel free to give me a call.
Answered on May 03rd, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Criminal Law Attorney serving Lancaster, NH
at
Harden Law Office
Update Your Profile
New Hampshire supreme court has ruled that the retroactive changes in registration requirements are not punishment but rather administrative and directed at safety of the public. As far as I know there is no US SCOTUs opinion.
Answered on May 03rd, 2011 at 11:31 AM
Wrongful Termination Attorney serving Huntington Beach, CA
at
Nelson & Lawless
Update Your Profile
Because the courts have ruled they are not. I dont know if SCOTUS has ruled directly, but a Google search will get you the cites from appellate courts.
Answered on May 03rd, 2011 at 10:47 AM