ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (01/15 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Recording of Emergency ACSOL meeting about new SORNA regulations



NJ Supreme Court Bars Retroactive Application of Megan’s Law Amendments

[ – 5/30/18]

The New Jersey Supreme Court on Wednesday held 2014 amendments to Megan’s Law enhancing certain penalties for sex offenders who violate parole requirements unenforceable against four defendants based on the ex post facto clauses of both the state and federal constitutions.

Read more


NJ Supreme Court finds Ex Post Facto violations as applied to 4 sex offenders [ – 5/31/18]


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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The story is behind a paywall. The actual decision, “State v. Melvin Hester / Mark Warner / Anthony McKinney / Linwood Roundtree (A-91-16) (079228)” can be found at the following link (PDF Download):

In a nutshell: the four defendants were sentenced to Community Supervision for Life (CSL), a special sentence that followed their custodial sentence. The decision stems from the fact that additional punishment was given to the defendants after their original sentencing. Read the syllabus from the opinion, the first two pages of the link, followed by the opinion.

It should be noted that the decision was 5-0, which means no dissent.

Another great win for Registrants! Another State saying retroactive application of new Megan’s Law rrstriction unconstitutionally violates ex post facto!

(BTW, Eric, it’s free to sign-up to that website – at no cost, it’s free – and you’ll get 5 free articles per month.)

It’s pretty sad that this case had to go all the way to NJ SC. It’s clearly an increase in punishment. But only in the bizzarro RC world does a post-sentence change of parole to “for life” have to be fought so long and hard. It still astonishes me the rabid defense and pursuit of all things RC. Laws, what laws? Constitution, what constitution? *SMH*


The word, “life” was never uttered during my 92 Trial in Rock County, WI. THEY claim to give people a fair trial. No mention of DNA either. THEY claim to operate under due process but refused to compare the rape kit to the sample I was forced to give before they released me in 95. THEY claim to have interest in truth and justice, yet continue to convict innocents. THEY claim electronic lists are not intended to bar or ban when they clearly are and ALWAYS were.

That the man who sold that Bill of goods to the court was made top dog is heartbreaking. You steal what you sew Mr. Roberts and I refer to liberty. Mr. Roberts is truly ignorant if he believes his claim: MACHINE NEED FOR DATA > HUMAN NEED FOR COMMUNITY.

“Registration itself imposed no affirmative disability” save the right to remain silent.

IMHO we’re so far down the slope we are, like our Nation Debt, too far gone to recover.

What IS the first thing you need to centralize power? Unfettered use of a database. The elites knew it long ago.

It appears they are still subject to life on parole. That I believe is the same as life in prison. It is a life sentence of punishment so I believe there has to be extra protection such as a person receiving life in prison gets. I think they get some kind of further due process or something like capital punishment does. Not sure but it sure seems like a life sentence should require heightened scrutiny.

Wow! Add New Jersey Supreme Court to the list that includes Pennsylvania Muñoz decision, Colorado’s Justice Matsch ruling, etc.:

Wow! Add New Jersey Supreme Court to the list that includes Pennsylvania Muñoz decision, Colorado’s Justice Matsch ruling, etc. The New Jersey Supreme Court actually listened to the scientific research and findings! Maybe they can now look at the truly low recidivism rates for those convicted of sexual offenses and rule accordingly with regard to those as well. Who knows, maybe they’ll even begin to regard Megan’s Law restrictions and requirements as the ex post facto punishments they truly are!

If only California would follow MANY would be off the website as that law passed I believe in 03?

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x