Montana Supreme Court rules Ex Post Facto registry requirements punishment and unconstitutional
Better words can’t be written in a court opinion: “Under our constitution, citizens have the right to be free from retroactive punishment,” the decision said. The Montana Supreme Court ruled recently that the application of new laws after someone’s conviction is unconstitutional. The requirements of the registry are so demanding that it represents punishment. The combination of the punishing nature of the registry and the after the fact (Ex Post Facto) application rendered it unconstitutional to both the Montana and the US Constitution.
Montana’s registry for sexual and violent offenders is very similar to most states. It started simple and unobtrusive in the lives of those affected. It only involved mailing a post card. Time on the registry was also supposed to expire. Over years of having the registry in place, so many requirements and punishments for failure to comply were added with each revision that it was deemed to control the lives of those forced to be on it.
As troubling to the Judges, was their alarm at the lack of benefit to having people on the registry. No evidence was presented that convinced them that all these new requirements were reducing sexual or violent crime rates. They concluded the registry only existed to ostracize those forced to be on it.
This ruling will benefit all Montanans forced to register whose crimes were before major changes took place to registry requirements. It is a very big win.
How can this Montana State Ruling Best Be Used to Benefit the Rest of the 49…? My Conviction was in Manhattan Federal Court in January of 2008, over 8 years before IML was ever signed into law, and I only served less than 2 1/2 years at Fort Dix! I left the States (NYC) in February of 2019, and except for a Month (March of 2019 because I was turned away from every country I flew to) in Hawaii, L.A. and Arizona, I have stayed away from the U.S.!!!!!!!
IF IML NO LONGER APPLIES TO ME, AND EVERYONE ELSE WHO WAS CONVICTED BEFORE IT WAS SIGNED INTO LAW, A WHOLE LOT OF US SHOULD BE TALKING TO A LAWYER ONCE THAT IS THE CASE IN THE STATE THAT YOU WERE CONVICTED!!!!!!!!
Neil, I too was convicted in a federal court (CP offense). I served 5 years in federal prison and 10 years of supervised release without incident. The judge ordered me to register wherever I live, work, etc. My lawyer raised the question on jurisdiction and different sovereignties, but the judge didn’t really answer it. Nevertheless, the 11th Circuit affirmed my sentencing on direct appeal. No shocker there. My conviction and sentence both predate the IML. I’d love for that law to not apply on ex posy facto grounds. Not sure how to get this done though since Florida’s registry has not been deemed unconstitutional yet. Maybe I need to move to a state where the registry scheme has been deemed punishment/punitive, then challenge the IML
This is a step in the right direction. Last month we noticed the ruling about posting no candy signs on Halloween was unconstitutional because of compelled speech. Which is more invasive to someone , to put a sign on your door one day a year or to list all your private information , plus labeling you as something that instills hatred to the uneducated. Then spreading it on the internet for millions to be able to take out their vengeance on according to their imaginary qualms. Why is this not also compelled speech. To say the least.
On the news last night, the Florida department of Corrections stated it is thinking about freeing all inmates 50 and over who have a chronic health condition. They stated they can no longer afford to keep treating these conditions.
Not sure if they are being released onto probation or not. Also no mention of if anyone with a sex offense is eligible.
Source is WFTV but could not find a hard copy of the story online.
That usually means that those particular inmates are costing the State too much in medical costs vs the money gained from their being incarcerated. It’s a cost cutting measure. Nothing altruistic there. /Shrug
Hooray! Seems like this Supreme Court see’s this registry as a bit of trespassing against another. Yes he made a decision which is a bit more theocratic and knows a lot about biblical truth. Many make choices as in well you made a choice in much of this registry game.
Decisions are more theocratic than a choice which is what I made. Course I had my discernment all the time but I didn’t want to argue with the officer at the time. Course he had to think of something else when I mentioned theirs a difference.. LE are dooming their own selves in all this game.
This is an excellent precedent in a relatively conservative state! We here in Florida will have our Ex Post Facto day in court as well!
This UNCONSTITUTIONAL ATTACK ON REGISTRANTS AND THEIR FAMILIES MUST END! So glad I can make monetary contributions to the Florida Action Committee.
guys little by little each state will come to change or abolish the registry. We already have a few states who have found this registry unconstitutional. We need to keep pushing forward and keep the good fight so justice can we serve to all. My hope is that in this next year SCOTUS will find SORNA unconstitutional and that will be our huge win. Lets be happy now for Montana.. God bless you and God bless the USA!