ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Oct 19 – Los Angeles, Nov 16 – Sacramento, Dec 14 – Phone | details

Emotional Support Group Meetings (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

ACSOLCalifornia

Judge Denies TRO, Schedules New Hearing on October 1 [updated with media]

An Orange County Superior Court judge denied a temporary restraining order (TRO) requested by Richard Linington, a registered citizen, and Michelle Moreno, his fiancée, during a hearing on August 19 that would have prevented the enforcement of new residency restrictions in the City of Cypress. Also during the hearing, the judge recommended that the City refrain from enforcing the restrictions until an October 1 hearing on a preliminary injunction.

“The City of Cypress has an opportunity to maintain the status quo by choosing not to enforce the new ordinance until at least October 1,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “Both parties will be given an opportunity on that date to provide the judge with a complete explanation of their positions.”

In the absence of a TRO, however, the City could choose to enforce its new ordinance, which could force Moreno to choose between living in her Cypress home of 26 years or continuing to live with her fiancée.

“This is a choice no one should be forced to make,” stated Bellucci.

At issue is this case is whether Cypress’ new ordinance complies with a recent CA Supreme Court case, In re Taylor, which held that residency restrictions in San Diego could not be applied as a blanket restriction to all registered citizens on parole. The Court in that case determined that the restrictions violated the registrants’ right to be free from unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive government actions. In reaching its decision, the Court noted that San Diego was densely populated and that there was a lack of affordable housing.

In this case, Cypress alleges that the city’s population is of medium density although the population density of that city is 7,300 people per square mile as compared to 3,771 in San Diego. The City also alleges that there is sufficient affordable housing for registered citizens.

“The judge has requested additional information from both parties on the topics of population density and affordable housing during the October 1 hearing,” stated Bellucci. “We will be prepared to show that the effect of the Cypress ordinance is to banish registered citizens from that city.”

Related

Registered sex offender, fiancee sue to live together in Orange County (ABC7 – with video)
Zoned out: A registered sex offender trying to move on collides with Cypress (OC Register)
Richard Linington and Fiancée Sue Cypress for Strengthening Sex Offender Ordinance (OC Weekly)

Join the discussion

  1. Janice Bellucci

    What happens in Cypress is of great importance to registered citizens in every city. Why? If Cypress is allowed to enforce residency restrictions, other cities will do the same and/or adopt new ones. So far, Cypress is an outlier in that 3 cities and 1 county repealed their residency restrictions after the Supreme Court’s decision in Taylor without being sued. Many more are watching what happens to Cypress in the lawsuit that is now pending.

    • Eric Knight

      I’m actually bit confused. Hadn’t Cypress been one of the cities that you sued? And if they were, was there a settlement or dispostion to that case? And if the settlement/disposition was in your (our) favor, then doesn’t this action violate it?

      Sorry for my layman’s confusion here.

      • Eric Knight

        Never mind, you already clarified it in another thread. Specifically, the city waited until the CA Supreme Court made their vaccuous ruling, then the city official read too much into it and came out with the new law that ostentatiously conforms to the ruling, hence the new lawsuit. Thanks.

  2. CA

    Was Richard Liningtons, conviction after Jessicas law passed ? Or was he incarcerated and the released after Jessicas Law passed? Why did the Judge refuse the TRO ?

    • Harry

      Because, the city council are his/her friends.

      • MM

        @Harry … Because who are his friends? What are you talking about? … . Please explain?! really … For all of us to hear what your thoughts are!

        • Harry

          The judge refuses to TRO against his/her friends on the city council

        • MM

          @harry … Sorry, I misread … Thought you meant the SO had friends on the city council. Thanks …

    • MM

      Richard Liningtons case was decided in 1987, well before Jessica’s Law. He was released in 1990.

      • j

        Then it is ex post facto punishment and exactly where the city and local governments find themselves beyond their authority.

        This judge ought to have his head examined and should be stripped of his title.

      • JM

        He was re-arrested in 2002 for failure to register. For this, he spent another 3 years in prison. At least this is what was stated in one of the articles.

  3. Agamemnon

    Godspeed to all parties in this venture fighting for the rights of reformation.

    People tend to forget that the system was established on the founding fathers’ Puritan Christian beliefs to afford people the opportunity to amend themselves and rehabilitate. It’s important to remember to those who believe in a higher power that we will not only be judged by how we treated our best, but by how we treated our worst.

  4. NPS

    It seems the 9th Circuit really messed things up for registered citizens. Because they only ruled on restrictions for those on parole, it left the rest of those who completed their sentences in some kind of limbo. Common sense would tell you upon successful completion of parole/probation, no more residency restrictions. But lawmakers do not operate on common sense. Do they really expect to apply restrictions once sentences are completed? This needs to be taken back to the 9th circuit.

  5. Eric Knight

    Ironically, with Janice’s batting average of a thousand, there have been no cases to take to a higher court, as cities generally won’t try to go to a higher court. If Cypress loses this case (I don’t see how they can win it without serious destruction of both the CA and US ex post facto and bill of attainder clauses), will they take it to a higher court? I doubt it.

    If the city prevails and notches the state’s first win ever against Janice, though, then I assume that CA RSOL will appeal. But this would still throw poor Richard’s and Michelle’s life in limbo hell, and I feel greatly for their situation. The registry is indeed a harsh and bitter source of human depravity all the way around.

  6. curiouser

    Just curious if there has been any movement on this case. I know the city council discussed in behind closed doors before their Sept. 24th meeting. Did the October hearing take place? Or is Cypress getting in line with the rest of the pitchfork wavers like Carson and Murrieta for their butt-kicking in court?

Leave a Reply to Eric Knight Cancel reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues 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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

.