I think it is retroactive if you already owned the home before the restriction was added.

Rewdiazepam would know better here. I recommend private messaging him.

go to your senators or get the best lawyer you can and take it to court.

Thanks to both of you for the responses. We have contacted two lawyers and the ACLU and am awaiting calls back.

I should've been more specific about the retroactive part. He was placed on the registry in 2001 and then tighter restrictions were enacted in 2006 and 2011 which added to the public registry in Michigan and to 1000 foot restrictions of living, loitering and working. It's so unclear what 1000 feet means. In any case we purchased our new home in September 2017 and have been here ever since. Hubby has registered 5 times with the state police and no one said a word until yesterday when he went to the city police.

I'm just so frustrated. The ACLU has a civil case fighting retroactivity for Michigan right now and here we are. I was hopeful that the laws would work themselves out because if this.

They luckily told my husband he had until August 1 to find somewhere else to live, but come on! I'm not just going to roll over because one person sitting at a desk told us we are wrong. I'm so tired as I know all of you are with the injustice the registry causes.

I'm just so angry and confused. I suppose for what we've already done in the last 24 hours we're on track at least for approaching this the right way.

Peace and love to all.

I have read the statutes regarding sex offender residency restrictions in Michigan, and I have some thoughts and ideas.

Most lawyers do not uderstand sex offender legislation, so I would not pay my hard-earned money just yet to get an attorney involved. At the present time, Michigan makes no exceptions for refusing to allow registrants from living withing 1,000 feet of a prohibited zone, in this case a school. The Sixth Circuit Federal Court decision in Doe vs Snyder may play in your husband’s favor. I know most of the newbies here do not understand the court system, retroactivity, Ex Post Facto laws, punitive vs civil laws, etc. You are not supposed to, as I did not understand it years ago either. I am here to painstakingly explain so you will understand and be better informed. It allows the mothers and wives the chance to sleep better at night when they have the power of knowledge.

https://tinyurl.com/y5gbwbeg

The federal judge in the case above had a hissy fit with the manner in which Michigan has applied parts of their registry retroactively to those registrants convicted years before said law was passed and she instructed the legislature to make the needed changes. The legislature in Michigan so far have literally ignored the court order and balked at fixing the damn problem, so Michigan is most likely in hot water over this mess. People just need to file civil suits against the state of Michigan and their refusal to obey a FEDERAL court order.

We can talk as long as you need. Right now all I have is time. I sent you a message explaining everything.

rewdiazepam

I just read your more detailed explanation regarding your problem.

If your husband was convicted before the regulations of the Michigan SOR were enhanced WITHOUT DUE PROCESS in 2011, then according to the judge in the case, then Michigan violated the Ex Post Facto portion of the Constitution when it applied the law retroactively. In other words, your husbands Constiituatiional rights were violated according to the Sixth Circuit.

You can file a lawsuit in district court alleging that your husband’s rights have been violated using the Sixth Circuit court as a precedent. The district court may turn you down, which in case your best bet is to file in FEDERAL COURT and get your appeal in front of a FEDERAL JUDGE and not one of the local yokels down there. But you need to file and lose in district court to take the case up the ladder to file in federal court. This may be your best bet to get some relief.

A FEDERAL JUDGE---if I know about FEDERAL JUDGES---will have a FIT that Michigan is continuing to violate your husband’s civil rights in violation of the Sixth Circuit Doe vs Snyder. Trust me, this will not sit well in Federal court.

We have until August 1 to get this done, and if it is filed before that date, they will not force him to move until the case is heard. DO NOT move and DO NOT give up. You have the law on your side.

Still contact me as I explained in my message and we will talk more about the situation. I AM NOT an attorney, but I know how the law works in this area and I can steer you in the right direction so this can be resolved using a paid attorney.

rewdiazepam

Laws punitive in nature cannot be applied retroactively to offenders convicted prior to the passage of the law. The key word here is punitive. For years, the states passing all these sex offender laws were able to pass more and more registration legislation which would affect all offenders, even if the law was not in place at the time of their conviction.

The state of Michigan has been violating the rights of offender whose crime was committed prior to the passage of the more restrictive laws in 2011. The goal is just to file a suit alleging this and having a judge issue an order in favor of your husband. If the court rules that the more oppressive laws do not affect your husband, then the residency restrictions should also not affect him. The reason the state has said nothing is they know this will be challenged and beaten in court. The local yokels rarely know anything about the law.

Passive of a punitive law and applying it to those offenders who were convicted before the passage of the law is a direct violation of the Ex Post Facto portion of both the federal and state constitution---states also have constitutions, btw. In other words, the retroactive passage of the laws is illegal if the law is punitive in nature.

The reason the constitution does not allow the retroactive passage of punitive laws is that it would allow retribution against enemies AND it is obvious it is unfair. When I was convicted in 1992 and given a 20 year prison sentence for a crime I did not commit, the jury recommended a 20 year sentence and ONLY a 20 year sentence in the custody of the DOC. The judge agreed when he sentenced me. Nowhere did the judge mention the words “registration,” or “sex offender” registry. Hell, the registry did not even become universally adopted until 1994.

When I was released in April 2000, all of a sudden the sex offender registry and all is restrictions was sprung on me. The state basically enhanced my court mandated sentence without DUE PROCESS, which was a violation of my civil rights. But it worked b/c back then the registry was deemed civil and not punitive and civil laws can be applied retroactively.

Like your husband, I was affected by a court decision in 2013, Starkey vs Oklahoma.

In fact, I wrote a recent post on another forum addressing the failure of the retroactive application of the harsher laws in Oklahoma, Ohio, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. Michigan is in the same situation but they have decided to be stubborn about it. I believe your husband should probably revert back to the original requirement he had before they enhanced his sentence by applying the 2011 upgrades.

Here is the post I wrote------

“””I want to personally welcome all the new members here on the board, while at the same time I want to encourage them to speak out on their issues (after all, this is probably the best support forum for sex offenders on the internet---and except for the ones on Facebook, I have seen them all.

My goal is to foster hope in the minds and hearts of all our members, and especially to the newbies. Why? Am I spouting false propaganda just to make everyone feel better? No, I have been involved in this mess for a long time now, and I can see how the landscape is changing in our favor.

So every once in a while, I have to copy and paste some of my old posts to remind everyone THAT WE ARE WINNING. No, it may not feel like it to the newbies, but we have the legislatures on the run. They now know that they have worn out the idea that everyone on the sex offender registry is a monster and that the rules of the sex offender registry are valid for public safety. In fact, many articles pop up now and then that ridicule the registry as it is structured today.

Why is it important for everyone, especially those new to this mess, understand that we are winning? B/c frankly, there are times for all of us when things are going so damn rotten and we feel wounded by all this mess. Sometimes we feel, “What the hell? Does it matter? Will I ever get a break and some justice?” Yes, we have all felt that way, so the facts that the tide has turned in our favor are important and we need to be reminded of such every once in a while.

So here are some old posts. Not everyone will be interested in these posts since some contain court decisions, but everyone should realize that the TIDE IS SLOWLY TURNING IN OUR FAVOR.

As I said in one of the posts----“So, I implore everyone here to just hang tight and try to be patient, even though I know it is very difficult. We ARE winning, and as you can see if you read my post, the tide is turning in our favor. We have the facts on our side. Let's just stick together and cripple this nightmare they call the sex offender registry.”

Before I even introduce my prior posts, in case someone thinks that REW is just BSing everyone to make them feel better, just look at the following post regarding all the court cases we have won in our favor over the past two or three years---------
Starkey vs Oklahoma----

tinyurl.com/ycnpv7yx

tinyurl.com/yc7qcn7c

The Starkey case was the case that removed me from the Oklahoma sex offender registry. The appellate attorney that won the case was John Dunn from Tulsa.

tinyurl.com/y75344a2


Williams vs Ohio

tinyurl.com/hxl2mfx

tinyurl.com/ybxulxzj

The Williams ruling was much like the Starkey ruling in that both rulings attacked the state constitution in regards to the retroactive application of SORNA. Both rulings were ex post facto rulings in our favor.

If I am not mistaken, the Williams case was the first case we won on the SORNA retroactivity.


Maryland decision on retroactivity of SORNA

tinyurl.com/ya3faeb4

tinyurl.com/y958yll6

I believe that Nancy Forster was the attorney that won this case. She is in the same league as John Dunn---awesome.


Pennsylvania vs Muniz

tinyurl.com/y944jq5x

tinyurl.com/yamw8hvf

This was another ex post facto ruling regarding the retroactive application of SORNA much like the Starkey and Williams case.


Packingham vs North Carolina

tinyurl.com/ycgdh36w

tinyurl.com/ydxhgvbb

This was a ruling by the United States Supreme Court against NC. I believe it was a unanimous decision 9-0. The USSC ruled that preventing sex offender from accessing social sites was a violation of the First Amendment.


Sixth Circuit ruling on Michigan sex offender registry

tinyurl.com/yaz3dloa

tinyurl.com/y7qqn746

One of the female justices here just excoriated Michigan for the manner in which they have handled the sex offender registry. Please note that the Sixth Circuit also includes Ohio, Tennessee, and Kentucky


Colorado

tinyurl.com/y8grd5d5

tinyurl.com/ycxurtxy

It is interesting to note that in most of these rulings against the retroactive application of SORNA the state---not the federal---constitution was attacked. States also have a constitution and in several of these rulings the application of SORNA to offenders convicted before the date that SORNA was implemented was ruled an ex post facto violation of the STATE constitution.

If Judge Matsch rings a bell, he was the judge in Timothy McVeigh’s trial. If we could get this ruling upheld by the Tenth Circuit, it would be a huge victory, as the ruling was that the entire damn registry was unconstitutional and a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Cynthia Coffman, the AG in Colorado, has appealed this to the Tenth Circuit. The Tenth Circuit scares me as they are very conservative and have handed down some screwy decisions.


International Megan’s Law

tinyurl.com/ybzje2le

tinyurl.com/yan6bmn4

tinyurl.com/ya3xzh9a

I am not up to speed on the IML situation. I think Janice in California was working on an appeal. My friend, ThoughtAsWeak would know more about this case than I do.

Cruise Lines

tinyurl.com/yby2pk9v

I wrote this entire post in a hurry. I have two diabetic cats I am trying to help and the little monsters keep interrupting me, so if you have any problems with the links, let me know. Yes, I am an animal fanatic.

rewdiazepam”””

Just some information you might find interesting.

rewdiazepam