Removal from sex offender registry.
Removal from sex offender registry.
I am trying to get removed from the sex offender registry even if it's temporary. I have drafted a motion to do so, however there are a few questions that I have about additional information that I could add to it. I'll copy and paste the text below from what I've written so far. I would appreciate any feedback or criticism. It's not complete yet, I have to add my argument and explain everything. I do know that the Supreme Court did decide that sex offender registries were not unconstitutional, so does that mean that ruling would be used as a blanket answer to anyone that had a pending motion to declare being on the registry unconstitutional. Could the state attorney's office here in Florida use that to deny this motion? Would Florida's ex post facto clause in the Constitution protect me from them using that ruling being that everything in my case happened before that ruling, and the passing of the Adam Walsh Act?
Here's what I've gathered so far
MOTION TO REMOVE REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER
Comes now, the Defendant, Pro Se, and moves this Honorable Court to remove the requirement to register as a sex offender as described in F.S 943.0435. In support of said motion, the Defendant states the following:
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
In January of 2000, the Defendant was ordered to complete 3 years of probation for a violation of F.S 800.4, which also means that he is required to register as a sexual offender as described in F.S 943.0435.
On January 13th 2000, Defense council filed a motion to declare F.S 943.0435 unconstitutional as to the Defendant. (Exhibit A)
On January 24th 2000, the Late Honorable Judge Robert G Barron granted this motion to declare F.S 943.0435 unconstitutional and ordered that the requirements be waived until it was determined if the application of these requirements to the defendant is or is not unconstitutional. (Exhibit B)
Presently, to this day, there is not an order, judgment, or finding (verbal or written), that states that there was a decision made as to the unconstitutionality of applying F.S 943.0435 to the Defendant, nor is there an order (verbal or written), that cancelled, voided, or nullified the above mentioned order in existence. This motion is still pending and active due to the lack of any final decision in this matter. This Order is still active and open.
According to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and Okaloosa County Sheriff’s office, the Defendant is required to comply with 943.0435
The offense that led to the Defendant being designated a sexual offender occurred in August 16th of 1999. The motion to declare F.S 943.0435 unconstitutional (Exhibit A), was filed by defense council on January 13th 2000. The Late Judge Robert G Barron. Granted said motion and ordered that Sex offender registration shall be waived, (Exhibit B). The order of termination of probation and completion of the sentence imposed was filed on June 16th of 2004. All of the dates mentioned above were prior to the passing of the Adam Walsh Act (SORNA).
Article I section 10 of the Florida constitution prohibits ex post facto laws. There is no language in the Adam Walsh Act that suggests that it is to be applied retroactively or exempting it from the ex post facto clause in Florida’s Constitution, thus granting this motion to waive 943.0435 as to the Defendant would not conflict with the Adam Walsh Act.
Samaritan & Scholar
Florida has one of the toughest sex registration requirements in the nation.
Any decision not rendered (in writing) isn't a decision.
The fact that the judge is dead makes what you're citing nothing more than rumor, gossip, or hearsay.
I don't see your recollection of the events as creditable, after all you're a convicted felon. That wasn't a smack at you, just a legal observation. It goes to your character and credibility.
Now, if the prosecutor or your defense attorney were to submit an amicus brief, maybe. But, there should be a record.
See if you can get a copy of the transcript, if the judge uttered his ruling on the record. In fact, it is custom, tradition, and the law for rulings to be read into the record.
Try contacting the court clerk.
Bottom line, don't expect miracles, although this is a good academic exercise; rulings such as you seek are rarer than honest people in prison!!!!
The Following User Says Thank You to army judge For This Useful Post:
I have an actual court order signed by the judge that states all of that information.
I have the court order that states that until it is determined if it is or not unconstitutional that 943.0435 will be waived. I have that in writing singed by the judge and stamped from the Clerk's office. So I do have it in writing. But the whole reason that I am trying to do this is because I know that I can petition the court to remove me off the registry after 10 years if I have no new felony convictions. Sadly, I was convicted afterwards of failing to register as a sex offender after that, so I don't qualify for the 10 year removal. I figure that I can test my waters first with this motion to remove me from the registry. If that is even successful temporarily then I can motion to vacate my sentence and conviction for that which means that I would fit the requirements to be removed after 10 years with no standing conviction. I've actually posted about this whole case before, and I remember you commenting before. I actually got locked out of the email that I used to register with this site so I couldn't get back in because my account got hacked. Thanks for your input
Samaritan & Scholar
If the judge signed it, that is probative at a minimum.
I'd be worried that the state hasn't appealed it.
The Following User Says Thank You to army judge For This Useful Post:
See that's the thing. When I went to court, the public defender that I had was the one who brought this up in court and said that me having to register was not fair. Either I forgot that that happened because there was so much going on and I was happy to just get probation and didn't pay much attention to what else was going on. I didn't become aware of the fact that this motion and order even existed until almost 10 years after that when I did some investigating on the Clerk's website then went to their office and ordered stamped copies. Apparently, the whole issue was forgotten by not only myself but the Court, and my Public Defender. So the whole issue is still without a decision. I'm pretty sure that the Florida Department Of Law Enforcement will put my case under administrative review and take me off the registry again, just like they did when I faxed them a copy of the order 2 years ago.
Do you know how to accuse somebody of Contempt of court, or what type of motion that requests that a court order be enforced. I want to challenge the FDLE as well. I would think that they are in contempt of court if they are making me register when I have a active court order saying that I don't have to? Can you allege that a government entity is in contempt?
@ army judge- I've read a few cases online about the ever changing sex offender registry laws, and the whole ex post facto issue with them. I've seen where courts have decided that because those laws were not intended to be punitive when created by lawmakers ex post facto wouldn't apply. So do you think that more than likely these laws will never be deemed unconstitutional but merely collateral damage as a result of a necessary legal function? Or do you think that there is some hope of relief from registering for some of us folks that are genuinely not going to commit more sex crimes or victimize children? Generally speaking, would you consider the hardships that a person on the registry has to go through, that made a one time mistake or lapse in judgment at a young age, a necessary evil that may punish a few unfairly but protect many? I do want to be taken off the registry for many reasons, but I have this feeling that it may never happen. Anyways. I've written up something that I plan on adding more to eventually. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Defining the Registry as punitive
The Registrant’s privacy is violated because their personal information is available to the general public. Addresses are made public which creates a possible threat because the Registrant’s enemies, vigilantes, or anyone whom the registrant considers to be a threat have access to all of this information. Even if there is only a perceived threat, there is still a negative consequence, because a Person’s address being published involuntarily, affects ones peace of mind which in turn affects a person life and liberty as well as well as a person being put in Jeopardy of life or limb actually or feeling that they are exposed to danger and not safe. How can a person pursue happiness or feel at liberty when their personal information is available worldwide? Being denied privacy or the right to feel protected and safe is contrary to what is described in the Bill of Rights Amendment V, which clearly states; “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;
nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,without due process of law; nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.”
1. Temporary Address
According to 775.21 (l) F.S, a temporary address is described as follows: “Temporary residence” means a place where the person abides, lodges, or resides, including, but not limited to, vacation, business, or personal travel destinations in or out of this state, for a period of 5 or more days in the aggregate during any calendar year and which is not the person’s permanent address or, for a person whose permanent residence is not in this state, a place where the person is employed, practices a vocation, or is enrolled as a student for any period of time in this state. This stipulation in the registry also invades the privacy and safety of others with whom the registrant associates with. For example; If a registrant spends more than 5 nights in a calendar year at any address other than his own, for example a friend, girlfriend or a relative...etc, he must provide law enforcement with that address, which is then posted on the Registry’s website, which could possibly affect the safety of others who need not be punished, or create a situation where the Registrant is denied the privilege of spending the night by a Friend or girlfriend because they don’t want their address negatively publicized thus denying the registrant liberty.
2. Electronic Mail Address
As per 775.21 (6) (a)F.S and 943.0435 (3) (d) F.S, Registrants must provide any “Electronic Mail Address” or “Instant Message Name” that is used by the registrant. This requirement leaves an opportunity for the Registrant to be unfairly accused of non compliance due to the lack of substantial verification of a Person’s true identity by electronic mail an instant message providers. Any person has the ability to falsely set up an email or instant message account, then report the “unregistered” account with law enforcement which would trigger adverse and unjust legal action against the registrant for violating the requirements of 943.0435 (3) (d) F.S. This action would unfairly cause the Registrant to loose their right to freedom by being arrested and incarcerated for a crime that was not committed.
3. Unfair restrictions on residency
There are two ways that current registration laws adversely affect the ability of Registrants to obtain housing: (a) Laws restricting persons convicted of certain sex offenses, and (b) Landlords and Rental companies that refuse to rent to Sex Offenders.
(a) Laws restricting persons convicted of certain sex offenses
775.215 (2) (a) prohibits anyone convicted of certain sex offense from living within 1,000 feet of any school, child care facility, park or playground. Being subject to this rule blocks off large sections of places a Registrant can live. Since school bus stops are very common, and designated and assigned to promote ease of access so that students may attend school, there can be many spread out and create large overlapping areas when many school bus stops are combined with schools, day cares, parks and playgrounds. This eliminates the majority of places one can live. With these restrictions in place it can be extremely hard to find a place that satisfies the registrants location, price, and housing needs, and may force the person to live somewhere that they don’t want to, which denies them the right to liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and essentially their freedom .
(b) Landlords and Rental companies that refuse to rent to Sex Offenders
Many landlords and Rental companies have the right to refuse to rent to anyone listed on the sex offender registry, and most exercise that right either because they feel that they are protecting their renters, or because their personal feelings about dealing with an offender. Furthermore, sex offenders are NOT protected by the Fair Housing act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) as described in the joint statement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice’s description of rights for reasonable accommodations under the fair housing act: “ No, juvenile offenders and sex offenders, by virtue of that status, are NOT persons with disabilities protected by the act”.
Samaritan & Scholar
Derek, as long as certain sexual offenders molest, harm, assault, and ruin the lives of children, the public outcry will be heard. Lawmakers will continue to try and thwart the efforts of some sexual offenders.
Children aside, Derek, lawmakers hear the cries of rape victims, too. The public wants to feel safe. I believe that many of these sexual offender registration requirements and restrictions to be overkill. But, if one child is saved, or one person is not raped; the ends justify the means.
I suppose one day, their will be exemptions for young offenders and offenders that remain law abiding for 10 or 20 years.
That said, many of these laws are no more harmful than the laws that deny convicted felons the right to vote in some states and the denial of their right to possess firearms in all states!!!
I know a friend who was labeled as a sex offender twenty years ago for a seventeen year old pulling a x rated movie out of his trash bin behind his residence. His life is now a living hell due to the reasons listed above. He was ordered to pay a two dollar fine and was not told of his future status. How's that for an ABUSE of the Adam Walsh Act ?
Here is another sad story - just recently on a family vacation at Disney in Orlando a family member was stopped at the gate while his wife and 3 children watched and told he could never enter another disney park or he would be arrested because of his past record. His record was that he had sex at 16 with a girl in his high school who was 13. Couldn't qualify for the Romeo and Juliet clause unless they were one year older. His life and his families has been made hell more than once, so not only that person pays the price - How can that not be punitive and who would have to fear him??
Perhaps any 13 year old would need to fear him.
He broke the law. Is it a sad story? Perhaps, for the 13 year old.
Samaritan & Scholar
How would Disneyland KNOW the person had been convicted of anything?
I've been to many amusement parks, and never had to show ID, just pay my entrance fees. Had I been asked for ID to enter an amusement park, zoo, movie theatre; I wouldn't enter anyway. I wouldn't show ID and vote with my wallet and feet. No, I'm no convicted sex offender or anything else.
Unusual story. Hard to believe.
Sent from my iPad3 using Tapatalk HD
I offer useless information. You should seek legal advice ONLY from YOUR lawyer!
Tags for this Thread