MT: State v. Hinman: Reconsidering the Retroactive Provisions of the Sexual or Violent Offender Registration Act
This case was argued but a decision has not been rendered yet. Still, this is an insightful analysis of the Montana Registration Statute.
Richard Denver Hinman appeals from his conviction under
Montana Code Annotated § 46–23–507, failure to register as a sex
offender, in the Second Judicial District Court, Silver Bow County.1
The Montana Supreme Court will review: (i) whether the retroactive
application of the Sexual Offender Registry Act (“SORA”) has a
punitive effect violating the ex post facto clause found at Article II,
Section 31 of the Montana Constitution;2 (ii) whether the lifetime
registration requirement of the SORA violates Mr. Hinman’s due
process rights;3 and (iii) whether the SORA deprives Mr. Hinman of
his civil rights under Article II, Section 28 of the Montana
Constitution.4 This Preview limits its focus to the first issue. For the
reasons discussed below, the Court will likely find the amended
SORA is a violation of the ex post facto clause of the Montana
Constitution.
If in Florida they now said all felons can not vote. It would be struck down so fast. Heck voting is a civil action, and most even agreed to it in their previous conviction(prior to new law granting restored right). It is the same thing, just venting
I’m curious about the judicial analysis that states that failure to register is not punishment for the initial offense because it is a separate crime. Perhaps there will be an example provided where a non-registrant could be charged with FTR to support such a conclusion.
I cannot believe I read all 33 pages of this, but I am glad I did. I just could not stop reading it. The back and forth concerning punitive/punishment scale was hard to swallow. The state could say boiling us in oil in front a crowd is not punitive and say it with a straight face. Mister/Misses politicians, come spend a week with our families, interview some of our neighbors who wish nothing but the best…………death. I suppose death is not even enough non-punitive punishment for them.
I pray for this person and their case. I pray the eyes, hearts and minds of the justices will be opened to the truth without bias.
I leave you with this :
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 12:21
Very disappointed in Public Defender Kristina Neal. Weak, weak, weak. And what’s with the annoying, groverly, monotone voice?? She has no idea where her case sits in the context of where we are in this process nationwide. WE NEED JUDGES TO UNDERSTAND THAT SEX OFFENDER LAWS ARE PUNITIVE! She was right there to make that statement loud and clear with conviction and confidence which she failed to do. You can even hear the judges mumbling at one point “i don’t understand about the ex post facto” and she just grovels on…. Pretty bad when your lawyer’s voice is so annoying, you can’t wait for her to quit talking. Which law school taught her to speak like that in Supreme Court cases?? so frustrating!
I discharged in two thousand they have put me in jail six times since I discharged,how about all the stuff the sixth judicial court Nels swandal threw me out of Livingston corruption plain and simple look into the sixth judicial court Livingston Montana corrupt basterds
A void judgement has no standing under the color of law US v Skilling’s once I asked for a change of venue,which was denied six judicial court Livingston mt.
Letter of law,the judge Byron L.Robb violated due process when he denied a change of venue,thus creating a kangaroo court.montana at it’s best corruption,Mark Twain said it best Montana is a beautiful place you just have to get past the corruption that is rampid here,no justice,injustice always.
STATE v. HINMAN
https://www.leagle.com/decision/inmtco20230614289
“We reverse, and we hold that SVORA, as amended since 2007, is punitive in nature. The requirements brought on by those amendments cannot be retroactively applied to defendants whose convictions predate them.”
Just released
More sources https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2023/da-20-0197-0.html
Don’t know if they will appeal it to the 9th circuit but the left coast is pretty liberal. So now we have Michigan and Montana saying expost facto punishment and potentially Pennsylvania ruling later this year… hopefully Florida is paying attention. Glad we got a much needed win.
PA Supremes already ruled expost Facto See the Muniz Case. Commonwealth V Muniz. Sooner or later SCOTUS is going to have to revisit this. Seems like more and more judges are rulling in our favor but only in part not the whole scheme. But the more bricks we can pull out of the wall the weaker it gets. All i can say is follow the rules to a T, pray for protection and treat the SPOT officers with respect.
This was from a couple of days ago https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/ohio-v-d-r/
They rejected a chance to hear the constitutionality of minors placed on life registries. That was a potential middle ground to do away with some of the registry but they declined to hear it.
This is great for Montana, but the 11th circuit already rulled that Sorna was not ex post facto. So I guess my question is if the local judge rules in our Favor will not the 11th Circuit just reverse his rulling? It seems as if McGuire V Strange 11th Circuit ruling has us trapped. IDK not an attorney. Maybe we have a better chance meeting with our legilators to see about a revamp of the Registry to only bind it to you with what it was at Offense date. IDK help me with some hope here 16 doing this plus 10 on paper.