CA Supreme Court to Hear Two Residency Restrictions Cases

The California Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument on two residency restriction cases on December 2 starting at 2 p.m.. The oral arguments are open to the public and will be held at the Ronald Reagan State Office Building, 300 South Spring Street, Third Floor, North Tower, Los Angeles.

“The issue of where a registered citizen may live is of great importance to more than 105,000 families within the state of California,” stated California RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “This issue is also important to the protection of the state and federal constitutions.”

The first of the two cases is People v. Mosley, for which the Court granted review more than four years ago. An important element of that case is whether residency restrictions apply only to registered citizens on parole or to all registered citizens. The source of the residency restrictions at issue is Jessica’s Law which prohibits registered citizens from living within 2,000 feet of a school or a park. That law, when codified, was placed in a section of the Penal Code that applies only to parolees.

The second of the two cases is In re Taylor for which the Court granted review more than two years ago. The focus of this case is whether the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) can prohibit all registered citizens on parole from living within 2,000 feet of a school or a park. The California Court of Appeal stated in its September 2012 decision that residency restrictions adversely affect three constitutional rights – the right to travel, the right to privacy and the right to establish a home. The Court ruled that blanket residency restrictions exceed the scope of its stated objective — the protection of children — because it eliminates nearly all existing affordable housing in San Diego for registered citizens and in essence banishes them from living within most if not all of San Diego County and because it treats all paroles the same regardless of whether his or her crime involved the victimization of children or adults.

“Registered citizens, family members and those who support registered citizens are encouraged to attend the Court’s oral arguments on December 2,” stated California RSOL Vice President Chance Oberstein.

California RSOL will conduct a press conference near the site immediately following the oral arguments.

Related posts

Subscribe
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 and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

79 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT!!! MANY POSITIVE VIBES & PRAYERS TODAY FOR THE ATTORNEYS ARGUING RESIDENCY TODAY! Remember you are not only arguing for the Registrants but their families as well!!! Good luck.

Well, it’s just after 9:00 am on Tuesday, 12/2 … I plan on leaving work at 12:00 noon today and driving to LA (and of course today it is raining!) maybe the rain can be viewed as a good sign!? The washing away of old thoughts and ways of doing things, a fresh/clean beginning for so many that deserve this. Prayers lifted for the attorneys today that their words reach the hearts of those with the power to make a change.

I’m realy concerned that the court will affirm the lower court decision and conclude that residency restrictions apply to all rso’s. It will be next to impossible to reverse such a decision and will have devastating effects on thousands of people. I know I did parole and believe me it was hell. Not to be negative but if they decide it applies to all rso and they try to enforce or implement the lifetime gps monitoring that’s also in the law I don’t know what I would do. There’s no way I could go through the rest of my life with a gps on my ankle.I know that isn’t mentioned in the case but it is in the law let’s all hope the court rules Jessica’s law doesn’t apply to all rso and that its an unfair condition of parole in the Taylor case as well because I know how hard it was to get through parole with the gps and residency restrictio. It was hell on earth.

My thoughts, prayers and good vibes are with ya’all! Knock ’em dead!

That’s all I can do is hope that people with the means and resources continue to fight for us that are being devastated by these laws. It will take people like frank and Janice who are both heroes and show tremendous courage.

Does anyone know how it went today? Been praying…

Praying Mom

I attended the Supreme Court’s oral arguments today and it appeared from the Justices’ questions that they are concerned about the effectiveness of residency restrictions for community safety as well as a broader concern about where to draw the line between what is considered simple regulatory procedure (i.e., 290 registration) vs. what is – in fact & in implementation – a punishment.

I was at the Supreme Court hearings , yesterday. I was more than impressed , The Justices were very concerned , all most compassionate about the harm that is being done to the people on the registory. . Especialy by Jesicas Law.and the residency restrictions. Several times The judges openly called Jesicas Law a ” STUPID LAW ” .. Over all their tone was very good, The laws are now too harsh. Generaly causing much more damage than good. I have a hearing problem. So I missed a lot of what was said. and I’m not a lawyer. How ever I was nearly brought to tears while listing to the ‘ Governments repersenative present their side of the argument . This was a young lawyer that I heard was from the Department of Corrections. He got his ass kicked, throughly , by all of the judges. It was heart warming. Then there was Our speaker. She was a young lady who was very well informed , very well prepaired and A very good speaker I think She made the the judges shed a tear , describing the harm that the system is doing to every one . I’m sure the court belives both the residence restrictions , and the regerstation system is efectivly punishment. Not what the department of corrections called colladeral damage. I came away thinking the Supreme Court thinks the pendulem has swung too far ! I’m not sure what the court will , or can do about it. But they are going to try!
It was a very good Day ! Merry Christmas to all !

PS Find out who the young lady who spoke for us is , send her a box of chocolates . If you can find the other guy from the Department of Corrections , Tell him I’ll buy him a drink , he needs it!

Does anyone have any more updates on these two cases? It can’t possibly be ruled for all registered citizens. That would not only punish those who have completed their sentences and parole/ probation terms, but also all the family members involved. That would definitely call for some sort of lawsuit.

Still hoping to see an update here about the case. If anyone has any news, please share.

To MM

Thank you! I really like your response. I will keep you and your husband in my prayers. Thank you again.
God bless

New CA Supreme Courices have just been confirmed this week!
The Court is likely to shift to being more liberal /progressive.
Hopefully, these new justices will be more realistic and reasonable – hopefully, in our favor.
Maybe we can – in time – get the Registry in its entirety overturned.
*fingers crossed*