Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
So you know I live in a state full of laws that I don't agree with.
No parks. No schools (without written approval from superintendent every time and they can deny for all but conferences -which means my child gets sick and I have to wait for permission in writing to get them?!?!). No pools. No zoos. No celebrating holidays. No mcdonalds or other play areas. No library. No park district classes even for my dog. And no dog park.
And I'm the mother and can't do these things.
I am off the list here. I have been a SO since 19.
I want to move to another state. There are several in the Midwest that are much more fair.
Never would I put myself in a position to be alone with kids but I really want to be able to watch band concerts and t-ball games! So I want to move to a state that will let me parent my children.
My husband says we are 'running' if we move. That we will get to a new state and they may pass a law that I can enter schools or parks and we will have moved for no reason.
My alternative is to stay and fight he says- but really? Unless we can overhaul the laws here my kids will be grown by the time there is progress!
I have two questions for ya'all:
1. If we have the means to do so is moving to another state to escape laws 'running'? I mean to stay and fight is also to risk arrest if I don't follow these laws 110% and then I lose my job, my freedom and am back on the list. I want to be a law abiding citizen. I just can't abide these laws.
2. I know anything is possible. But can you see states like MI or WI whose state laws only apply to those who need to register (and I don't any longer) going 'backwards' and changing laws to apply to all convicted vs. registered? No, right? I can't see states like these going backwards. Or MN suddenly adding restrictions to all when their first two tiers are private. My husband claims we will move and these states will suddenly change to mirror IL and I argue I don't think the laws would pass in those states like they did here.
Thoughts? Stay put and risk messing up? Uproot the family and 'run' somewhere with better laws?
What would you do?
(Sorry for the typos I'm on my phone!)
No parks. No schools (without written approval from superintendent every time and they can deny for all but conferences -which means my child gets sick and I have to wait for permission in writing to get them?!?!). No pools. No zoos. No celebrating holidays. No mcdonalds or other play areas. No library. No park district classes even for my dog. And no dog park.
And I'm the mother and can't do these things.
I am off the list here. I have been a SO since 19.
I want to move to another state. There are several in the Midwest that are much more fair.
Never would I put myself in a position to be alone with kids but I really want to be able to watch band concerts and t-ball games! So I want to move to a state that will let me parent my children.
My husband says we are 'running' if we move. That we will get to a new state and they may pass a law that I can enter schools or parks and we will have moved for no reason.
My alternative is to stay and fight he says- but really? Unless we can overhaul the laws here my kids will be grown by the time there is progress!
I have two questions for ya'all:
1. If we have the means to do so is moving to another state to escape laws 'running'? I mean to stay and fight is also to risk arrest if I don't follow these laws 110% and then I lose my job, my freedom and am back on the list. I want to be a law abiding citizen. I just can't abide these laws.
2. I know anything is possible. But can you see states like MI or WI whose state laws only apply to those who need to register (and I don't any longer) going 'backwards' and changing laws to apply to all convicted vs. registered? No, right? I can't see states like these going backwards. Or MN suddenly adding restrictions to all when their first two tiers are private. My husband claims we will move and these states will suddenly change to mirror IL and I argue I don't think the laws would pass in those states like they did here.
Thoughts? Stay put and risk messing up? Uproot the family and 'run' somewhere with better laws?
What would you do?
(Sorry for the typos I'm on my phone!)
One thing you should know is this---
I have had at least one criminal defense attorney tell me that if you ever get off the registry, you should stay in that state. He said if you move even after you are off the registry in that state, you are making yourself liable for a federal requirement to register.
Follow this link to question # 5 on the page the following link takes you to. John Dunn is the appellate attorney that handled the Starkey case in Oklahoma, so he should know.
http://tinyurl.com/lr9fnun
He said---
"""HOWEVER, if you have been convicted of a listed crime and you travel in interstate commerce, you have made yourself subject to a Federal requirement to register."""
I know this concept has been the subject of debate, but it is something to be aware of. I don't fully understand what John Dunn is saying here or the legal concept behind it, so if someone else could chime in and explain it further, I would appreciate it.
BTW, I thought you said you were off the list. If you are no longer a registrant in the state in which you now live, how can any of these laws affect you? How can any of the registration rules apply to you??
rewdiazepam
Milwaukee, in this liberal state has restrictions like Miami, FL...
I know that in other areas between Milwaukee and LaCrosse that things have been proposed... just as a warning about the area... the backwards 'L' that covers from Green Bay to Milwaukee and then LaCrosse are usually undesireable places for a SO to be released to and live in.
Rew, I know that in WI the registry requirements are based off conviction and regardless if off the registry in another state the registry could apply to you here all based on conviction statute. Plus once you register here in WI, you must for LIFE (unless released from it) even if you move away. There has been a case recently where two John Does won at the District court level federally but then it got overturned in the appeals court, not sure if it is going towards the Supreme court or not, they have spent a lot of money already to get this far. Check out the Registry Fee Case under Wisconsin here: https://sites.google.com/a/wisconsinreform.org/new/document-library
As for the being off the registry, moving to another state and then be subject to federal registration. Not sure how that would apply as there has been no new crime, there was not transfer from state to federal at all, and if you have been removed from the registry at the state level, I believe the constitution blocks the feds from imposing things like that after the fact as these kinds of situations were usually left to the states to govern themselves. That I would say an attorney needs to be consulted for clarification. I would like to see them try to enforce a registry violation like that for traveling from state to state AFTER you have been removed from the registry. First of all to catch you, they would have to have a reason to stop you, federally. Since they are not the ones giving out speeding tickets, then I wonder how they would even enforce it, arrest for it and be notified to investigate for it. Sounds like a lot of wasted money, time, man power and energy.
In her initial post, she tells of all the restrictions in her state---No schools, no parks, no zoos, etc.
Then she goes on to say, """And I'm the mother and can't do these things."""
I am off the list here. I have been a SO since 19.""
If she is off the list in her current state, why can't she "do these things" if she is off the registry? All those restrictions should not affect her if she is off the list in her current state. Is that correct, or am I missing something? She should be able to do those things in her current state since she is no longer a registrant.
rewdiazepam
http://www.premierdefensegroup.com/blog/oklahoma-sora-registration-unconstitutional/
Mendoza-Martinez Factors
To determine whether the registration scheme was punitive, the court utilized the Mendoza-Martinez factors that were used in Smith v. Doe (2003):
"whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint";
"whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment";
"whether it comes into play only on a finding of scienter";
"whether its operation will promote the traditional aims of punishment—retribution [48] and deterrence";
"whether the behavior to which it applies is already a crime";
"whether an alternative purpose to which it may rationally be connected is assignable for it"; and
"whether it appears excessive in relation to the alternative purpose assigned
I think what he is talking about here is similar to what happened in Missouri. The Missouri Constitution has an extra clause about retroactive laws over and above the standard ex post facto clause. Because of that the registration laws were challenged and found to be unconstitutional at one point but the courts turned around and said it didn't matter because offenders would still have a federal requirement to register.
Oklahoma registrants that no longer have to register due to the Starkey decision may still have a federal obligation to register because they weren't on the registry for the minimum time specified by SORNA and that still applies retroactively even though the state obligation no longer does.
I don't think it matters in IvyDog's case because she served the ordered amount of time on the registry which should in theory satisfy any SORNA requirements.
1. The supreme court here ruled the residential restrictions was unconstitutional
2. It's a city and the cops have enough to do than to both my son.
3. the PD is also low on funds so they spend the $$ on real criminals
4. the probation office has 1 guy taking care of everyone in this part of town.
5. my son doesn't drive but he can walk to a lo of stores or there's a great bus system and the train.
I lived in the country in Floriduh and I wouldn't go back to the country even here in PA. There are few neighbors but most want to be chummy and they all want to know your business.
That's just my personal experiences.
So someone that isn't on the registry could be subject to criminal prosecution if they are caught doing certain things because they have a prior conviction that qualifies them.
I was off the registry in PA for a year when they enacted the AWA. I did the mandated 10 years. According to the new law, I would have been Tier 1, a 15 year registration. I did not have to register again because the PA law specifically said that if you were off the registry you stayed off if you were not convicted of another crime.
I believe Ivydog would come under this ruling in PA since she was already off the registry in IL when PA enacted its law.
Silly me thought when I was off the list my life would be 'normal'.
Nope. In the letter removing me from the registry it says something to the affect of 'pursuant to state laws you are still subject to....' And lists all the codes.
I questioned IL Voices for reform and they agreed police are enforcing laws even against those no longer registered because that is how the laws are written. No one has challenged it in court.
Back in the day there were no tiers. Everything was 10 years here. Maybe it made sense to them then. But now with tiers it would seem those who are deemed dangerous would be on for life and subject for life.
But for one count possession of CP isn't federal guidelines 10 or 15 years? Then you're off?
I'm well past that...
What I do have to worry about is traveling to other states. Like FL or Nevada or CA because even though I'm off the registry here based on their laws I'd be a lifer and so I can't outstay their time restraints (48 hours in Vegas). And that makes working difficult!
As of July 1, 2013, the State of Oklahoma has not adopted the Federal Sex Offender Registration Act. HOWEVER, if you have been convicted of a listed crime and you travel in interstate commerce, you have made yourself subject to a Federal requirement to register.
It makes it sound like if I travel between states I am governed by Federal law... Meaning no need to register and not state law of the state I am traveling to?!?!
Like FL can be construed as if you establish a temporary residence (somewhere you're staying for 5 or more days) you must register within the first 48 hours. That's state law. But if interstate travel for commerce purposes (that means work, right?) is governed by the Feds... Could I stay longer in FL if need be without registering? Or longer than 48 hours in Vegas if it's for business?!
So moving is not easy for him. (Nor for me but I handle change better).
He is union and his union connections are here but his job isn't what we are factoring except making sure we are near a large enough metro area for him to find work.
Same for me. My job moves with me but if I lose it I need a metro area large enough to pull from.
And Maisr- nope, if I were in FL I'd never be off the list.