Back to Table of Contents

Ohio Court Challenge: A brief as amici curiae in support of a registered sex offender. The brief points to and utilizes the findings of many substantial research articles. The request is to allow the appellant to maintain his residency pointing out that registration requirements 1) have not proven to protect children and may even cause more harm, and 2) have been imposed due to public fear, not facts.

This complaint alleges unconstitutionality of Ohio’s June 2007 sex offender registration law because it classifies risk solely on the basis of conviction offense. The complainants argue that this makes the law punitive rather than civil and remedial and therefore it cannot be applied to individuals convicted before its implementation date.

A decision from the Federal 9th District Court ruling that California’s (2006) voter-enacted legislation restricting sex offenders’ residences and mandating GPS monitoring should not be retroactively applied to individuals sentenced prior to enactment. States that it is a well established principle that laws are never applied retroactively unless there is specific instruct to do so in the legislation itself, because any retroactive application is necessarily raises Constitutional issues and the California legislation contains no such specific instruction.

A study examining the potential deterrent effect of residency restrictions by analyzing the sexual re-offense patterns of the 224 recidivists released between 1990 and 2002 who were re-incarcerated for a sex crime prior to 2006. Findings -Not one of the 224 sex offenses would likely have been deterred by a residency restrictions law.

Text of a temporary restraining order issued by the United States (9th) District Court prohibiting implementation of California’s voter-enacted residency restrictions (2006) because they are on their face, punitive and therefore cannot be retroactively applied to individuals convicted before the law was enacted. States that a temporary order is necessary because allowing enactment pending full hearings would cause irreparable harm to affected individuals. (Note: In a separate ruling, the same court denied a TRO petition in relation to GPS monitoring, on the basis than implementation pending hearings would not cause plaintiffs irreparable harm.)

This exploratory study describes the impact of residence restrictions on sex offender reintegration and informs about sex offenders’ perceptions of these laws. Most indicated that housing restrictions increased isolation, created financial and emotional stress, and led to decreased stability. Respondents also indicated that they did not perceive residence restrictions as helpful in risk management and reported that such restrictions may even inadvertently increase risk by increasing their exposure to stressor than have been shown to trigger reoffenses. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

The September 06 issue of the CQ (Congressional Quarterly) Researcher newsletter in its entirety; devoted to examining whether tough new sex offenders laws might not in fact be increasing rather than decreasing risk for potential victims, this newsletter offers a very nice summary of facts about child sexual abuse and related safety issues.