TX: Constitutional or not, court allows registration requirement for sex-offenses predating registry law

The Texas District and County Attorneys Association’s weekly case summaries last week described a new Court of Criminal Appeals decision which required sex-offender registration for offenses committed before the creation of the registry. The decision, though, failed to address the question of whether the underlying statute is constitutional, an issue dissenters said they should have confronted.  Full Article

Related posts

Notify of
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This country has a justices ystems of convenience not equal and fair courts or laws.

Don’t look for lawmakers to do any soul searching for constitutional soundness at this stage. They will put the ball into play and let the consequences play out later down the road with yet another predictable waste of sorely needed public funds.

Make no mistake about it, the goal is punishment and overreaching and extreme intrusion and removal of inherent liberties decades beyond the closure of registrants’ individual cases.

The lawmakers will go to every extent possible to disguise it as non punitive by wrapping it up as a ‘containment model’. They can’t see the forest for the trees on this one for sure.

The public gets fooled again and at the same time it is a win win for legislators, public officials, prison industrialists and extremists that would never take on the challenge of delving into the subject of constitionality. That would cost them money and votes quite simply stated.

It would be less expensive in the long run to put in a sound and manageable plan that adheres to constitutional guidelines. Is there even a Valid and Up to Date risk assessment tool that is being evaluated in this frenzy?

While there is robust inter-state collaboration on how to disenfranchise these American Citizens, is there inter-state sharing of actual statistic on recidivism such as the Cal- DOC document that clearly highlights the overblown proportion of these laws? My guess would be NO.

That is simply asking too much because the actual statistics and facts about danger posed, recidivism rates and actual effectiveness of these laws fly in the face of the distortions, omissions, rhetoric and fear mongering necessary to energize these efforts and gain popular support.

They rely on a misinformed public and are happy to omit anything counter to their effort – such as actual facts otherwise once known as truth.

Ex post facto protections are there for a myriad of reasons and they simply choose to ignore them. That, ladies and gentlemen, IS the truth.

They probably has people testifying in opposition during a subcommittee meeting.
I’d have to do more research to see if ACLU and others actually took a stance. The numbers of laws being enacted at all levels is so immense, the fraying and damage to the constitution is beyond believable proportion. The joke on the rest of the public is when these mechanisms expand and start entrapping everyday citizens in this same manner. Then ‘they’ will know it is too late. We’re just an odyssey right now but when other groups are selected, targeted and stripped of constitutional rights, it will be a real big deal.