Posted on 10/29/2005 2:06:43 AM PDT by Quaker
This courtesy of the AP:
Justices Say Sexual Predator Expansion Not Retroactive
Oct 27, 2005
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - An offender who did not qualify as a sexual predator when sentenced cannot later receive that designation even if the criteria is changed to include his crime, the Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
Sexual predators must register with the state for the rest of their lives and their whereabouts are public information.
Assistant Deputy Attorney Generalde at sentencing, not later, except for out-of-state convictions. John Richard Therrien did not meet the criteria when he was sentenced, she wrote.
Therrien was 16 in 1996 when charged with molesting a 9-year-old girl in Pensacola. Prosecuted as an adult, Therrien pleaded no contest in August 1997 to attempted sexual battery by a person under 18 on a child under 12 and lewd and lascivious assault.
The judge withheld adjudication and placed Therrien on probation for five years with a suspended jail sentence of 11 months, 15 days.
The Legislature subsequently changed sexual predator criteria to include attempted sexual battery by a person under 18 on a child under 12.
Three years after Therrien was sentenced, a judge granted the state's request to designate him as sexual predator under the revised law. That decision was upheld by the 1st District Court of Appeal, but the Supreme Court quashed the appellate ruling.
The Florida Supreme Court in all it's Omniscience decided that Therrien isn't a sexual predator now for an act that he committed in 1996 because it wasn't a law then? I'm confused. This, efficaciously shields Therrien from being identified as a predator. Communities have a right to know who is living in their neighborhoods and the possible consequences that may result.
Not at all surprised with them. They showed their colors in 2000. Amen.
I'd have to agree with the SCOFLA on this one.. 'Ex post facto' and all that...
The FL Supreme Court is actually correct. The US Constitution requires that any loss of liberty (the freedom to do whatever doesn't violate the rights of others) be imposed by due process of law--which means that it must be imposed as a sentence rendered by a court pursuant to conviction for a crime. Punishments imposed directly by a legislature--especially including ones "tacked on" after a court has already imposed a sentence--are Constitutionally prohibited. The reason is because such laws are Bills of Attainder, and are explicitly forbidden by the Constitution (a prohibition that applies to both Congress and the States.)
They're exactly right on this one. The Constitution explicitly forbids it:
"No Bill of Attainder (punishment without trial) or ex post facto (after the deed) Law shall be passed."
Government employees and courts are full of perverts and sexual predators. It is known. So go figure....soddom's on the way and they get special protections.
A judge in my town let basicaly a statutory rapist go because he did not have sex, "he made love to her".
Exploitation is exploitation, and the government has a big conflict of interest in this topic implying victims should fight back with a gun.
I'm not sure ex-post facto applies here. Being designated a sex predator is as much a mental health designation as a criminal one.
Are you saying that if someone is determined to be a predator by a mental health expert they can then be placed on the sexual predators lists?
That's just so wromg.
Where was this supreme court when Clinton was giving us retroactive taxes????????
A designation isn't a punishment, so I don't think ex post facto should apply. If the IRS puts a new form on its 1040's required if you have ever been charged with tax evasion, is that ex post facto? The actions were illegal when committed, the punishment does not change. Would it be illegal for the state to begin tracking the addresses of people with more than two DUIs?
Would you like to be assessed back taxes and penalties for every year you had income if they raise taxes next year? This is an accurate reading of the law with an unfortunate consequence, IMHO.
Let's assume a man is following little children (not against the law, nor a sex crime). He is questioned by a police psychologist, to whom he tells that he wants to rape children. What's your game plan?
Im not 100% Certain on this law. My sister was murdered by a predator in 1977,my grandmother helped initiate a death penalty law in my state,and that would have ony affected convictions since the date the law was enacted.I believe that since this isnt a criminal charge,maybe it is an ok law?Although the same reasoning could be used in a d.u.i database.or other less menacing laws.slippery slope scenario here.Not to diminish d.u.i convictions.
A designation is part of a statute, which is a law. Ex Post Facto covers changes in a law as well as new legislation. When you change a law, it effectively becomes a new law.
So it is illegal to call Negroes "African-American" unless they were born after that "designation" was added to the law? Ex post facto applies to making something criminal (punishable) and applying it to actions which occurred before the law as passed. Unless there is punishment, there can be no ex post facto.
If this is true (I always thought it was), how did the Supreme Court reconcile ruling that the Lautenberg amendment, which removes your right to possess a firearm or ammunition if you were convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence long before the amendment was passed, as Constitutional?
>> If the IRS puts a new form on its 1040's required if you have ever been charged with tax evasion, is that ex post facto? Would it be illegal for the state to begin tracking the addresses of people with more than two DUIs?
Those changes could not apply to those previously convicted. You may not like the outcome on this particular case, but surely you're not arguing that retroactive laws are good, are you?
It's not as though he's being tried or punished for a newly created crime -- it's just a new descriptor for what he is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.