TN: Huge win as Tennessee District Court slams the state for it’s registry violating ex post facto provisions.
Even though it had the benefit of relying on 6th circuit precedent, a Tennessee Middle District Court judge yesterday slammed the state for violating the Ex Post Facto provision of the Constitution by applying registry restrictions and conditions to people whose offenses predate those restrictions and conditions.
In the Order, the Court stated, “Under the Constitution, a backward-looking sexual offender registry—although perhaps permissible on its own, see Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 105–06 (2003)—is not a license to heap an endless parade of new and severe punishments on individuals whose long-ago offenses carried no such consequences when committed”
While Does v. Snyder (the 6th Cir. Opinion that found the Michigan Registry to be punitive and violate Ex Post Facto provisions) was binding precedent in this case (Tennessee is in the 6th Circuit, so the Court had to apply it), the Judge still went out of her way to write a very insightful order, essentially reprimanding the state for their conduct. You can read the Opinion here: Does v Lee – Tenn Middle District Order
I was convicted in 1985 for a sex crime. I was released in 1992 after serving 7.5 years. I was informed in 2011 that I had to register as a sex offender. I must report every quarter to stay in compliance. Being placed on the registery was not a part of my sentence. I am disabled on a fixed income. So how would I go about being removed from the registry?
David
You are in the same boat as me, was retroactively placed on registry in 1997 after a 1991 crime. I was told after 20 years of being off of paperwork, IE: Probation, house arrest, etc, you can hire a qualified specialist lawyer to petition the court to remove you from the registry. As long as you have had no arrests since.
Check under the tab at the top of this page where is states Resources and under that heading is Attorneys specializing in RSO issues. Hope that helps.
A list of lawyers on FAC website but not sure what state you live in. I am in Florida.
Correct me if I am wrong but some of the members here are pointing out to Supreme Court decisions and while the Supreme Court has not ruled in our favor if more of these decisions such as the ones in TN and MI side with us, (Does v Synder) can we eventually see a third attempt or some sort of hearing before the Supreme Court?
George
I myself am kind of concerned about that. Right now it seems a more conservative court is the majority. If we get a lost in the highest court , we may be done for. Many times they do not want to rule at all and kick it back to the lower court who them denies us.
Sort of another catch 22 situation. We are use to those unfortunately. Am I saying we shouldn’t try? No I am not saying that, just have to look at who is on the court and how they have ruled before they were on the higher court to get an idea of what their values and agendas are.
One thing is for sure, some judge needs to grow a pair and tell the truth of the massive punitive nature the registry is. When someone on the registry gets killed in their own driveway (See previous FAC posts) for being on the registry, that is glaring proof we are being punished to the point of being murdered. Not murdered for what we may or may not have done in the past, rather for daring to live in the neighborhood.
I’m looking for an attorney in TN, for registry removal
Have you been on the Tennessee registry for at least five years And on any registry Tennessee or otherwise for at least 10 years?
The State of Michigan actually did appeal the Does v Snyder case to the US Supreme Court, but the Court declined the opportunity to review it. That’s why the decision is binding in the Sixth Circuit. There really is no way to predict how the Supreme Court would rule today. Sometimes conservative Justices issue rulings that favor individual rights over public opinion. Sometimes not. It would at least be an opportunity to present real facts and refute myths and false assumptions about recidivism and danger to society. But it is exceedingly rare for ANY case to make it to the Supreme Court.