Six people who filed a lawsuit against the State of Michigan, challenging the constitutionality of its Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA), have been removed from the public sex offender registry after a final order in their case, Does v. Snyder, was issued in January.
The judgment, signed by The Hon. Robert H. Cleland of the Eastern District of Michigan, enforced a unanimous panel ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The court held that the 2006 and 2011 amendments to Michigan’s SORA violate the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and therefore cannot be applied retroactively to people convicted before the changes went into effect. The court said SORA “brands registrants as moral lepers solely on the basis of a prior conviction. It consigns them to years, if not a lifetime, of existence on the margins, not only of society, but often…from their own families.” The decision became final last October when the U.S. Supreme Court denied the state’s petition for certiorari. As a result, the Michigan legislature will have to rewrite the state law. Full Article
Hello, Everyone
Well I finally got an email back from Mrs Lewis, and from what she says makes me think what was the point of taking Does v Snyder in the first place, if this is all they are doing right now. Just my thought’s but everyone that is pre-sorna should be removed the registry shut down until this is all hashed out, but we all know that is never going to happen here in Michigan. So here is what she had to say to me.
Unfortunately, under Supreme Court caselaw, basic registries are legal and can be applied retroactively. What the Court of Appeals held in Does v. Snyder is that Michigan’s registry has become so extreme that it is punishment. The Court held that the 2006 amendments (zones) and 2011 amendments (extension to life and extensive reporting requirements) could not be retroactive. Even the 5 Does plaintiffs are still required to register: they are on the private registry and not subject to the zones or extensive reporting, but they still have to register.
All of this means that in negotiating, we have to accept that there will be some kind of registry. We are negotiating in the hope that we can get an even better outcome for people like you than we got for the plaintiffs in Does I. We will be pushing hard for much shorter registration terms, which would mean that someone like you, who has already been on for 25 years would come off entirely.
I think it is unlikely that we will have resolved the lawsuit by March 2019. Nevertheless, it may be worth having your attorney write to the MSP to say that 1) your registration was extended from 25 years to life in 2011, 2) under Does the 2011 amendments extending your registration cannot be applied retroactively; and 3) you have completed 25 years, and therefore you request that you should be removed from the registry.
Sincerely,
Elaine
That to me sounds like this is going no where and they are just blowing smoke up everyone’s ass just to make us think they are doing something and making progress. Well I will take her suggestion about writing MSP to be removed, I can’t afford an attorney so I will email, write or call them my self,and see what happens. I did write and email Rick Jones Rick Snyder, and Bill Schuette, and a spokes person for Jones was the only one that responded, he said that they have no power to remove people such as my self that is pre-sorna from the registry, but to call or write or email MSP to ask them to remove me since I am pre-sorna. and gave me the direct number to MSP’s SOR’s phone number. So I will let you all know what happens when I figure out exactly what I want to say to them, sincei will be doing this with out a lawyer.
stay tune, but any help or suggestions on how I should go about doing this would be greatly appreciated since I am clueless about how to do this, but nothing will get done if I don’t at least try something thanks in advance. Bobby
hello,
Well I emailed the Michigan State Police and asked them to respectfully but sternly to remove me from the registry, since the 2006 and 2011 amendments no longer apply to because of the 6th Circuits ruling in Does v Snyder, and I finally got a reply back today and this is what they said:
The department recently received your email regarding the validity of maintaining your record on the Michigan Sex Offender Registry. On August 25, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit released an opinion in the case of John Does #1-5 and Mary Doe v. Richard Snyder and Col. Kriste Etue, Case No. 15-1536, Case No. 15-2346, and Case No. 15-2486 on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
The court concluded that the retroactive application of the 2006 and 2011 amendments to Michigan’s Sex Offender Registration Act are unconstitutional Ex Post Facto laws as applied to the six named plaintiffs in the case. The 2006 amendments prohibited registrants from living, working, or loitering within 1,000 feet of a school and the 2011 amendments divided the registrants into three tiers based on the crime of conviction and increased reporting requirements of registrants.
The Michigan State Police (MSP) is working with the Michigan Attorney General’s Office to review the court’s opinion in this matter and any registrant that may be affected will be notified, via mail, of any changes to their offender requirements. At this time there are no changes to your requirements and you are still required to continue registration as outlined by the Michigan Sex Offender Registration Act.
If you have any questions you may contact the Michigan State Police Sex Offender Registry (SOR) Unit at 517-241-1806.
Thank you,
MSP SOR Unit
So it looks like I will be calling these fools as soon as I find that one article or the part in the 6th circuits decision where it clearly says that the 2006 and 20011 amendments can no longer be applied retroactively to registrants who’s convictions are pre-sorna. That way maybe that will convince them to remove immediately. I know it’s a long shot and probably a lost cause, but it’s worth a shot. So if anyone knows where I can find that statement that the 2006 and 2011 amendments can no longer be applied to pre-sorna registrants I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you in advance and Merry Christmas & happy New Year to all.
@Josh @Will Allen and anyone else willing to chime in
I think I found what I was looking for in regards to who the 6th’s opinion actually applies to especially now that SCOTUS has rendered their decision as well. I copied and pasted the important parts so please ANYONE tell if the decision actually does apply to everyone now that the 6th and SCOTUS has spoken.
Here it goes: To Whom Will the Court of Appeals Decision Apply?
It is hard to know the answer to this question, because there is not yet a final judgment in Does v. Snyder. If the state seeks en banc review or petitions for certiorari, and if either the full Sixth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court accepts the case, another 8-15 months could pass before a final decision issues.
The case was brought only on behalf of the six named plaintiffs. However, if the Court of Appeals’ decision is not modified during further appeals, the court’s reasoning that the current version of SORA is punishment will apply to everyone whose offense was committed before July 1, 2011. The court’s reasoning that the geographic exclusion zones are punishment will apply to everyone whose offense was committed before January 1, 2006. The relevant date is the date of the offense, not the date of conviction. and also III. Advising Current Registrants On Compliance, Removal From the Registry, Or Exemptions From Certain Registration Requirements.
We recommend that all registrants stay SORA-compliant until there is a final judgment. State criminal courts are not bound by federal appellate decisions (except for U.S. Supreme Court decisions), and is not yet clear how Michigan state courts will apply the Does v. Snyder decision or what the Michigan Supreme Court will decide in People v. Temelkoski. We strongly recommend full compliance to avoid criminal charges or other consequences.
Registrants who are on parole or probation should follow all parole and probation orders related to their sex offender registration.
The Court of Appeals’ decision held that the 2011 amendments to SORA, which extended many registrants’ obligations from 25 years to life, cannot be applied retroactively. Because there is not yet a final judgment, we do not recommend that registrants file motions to shorten their registration periods back to 25 years. If Does v. Snyder is modified or reversed during any further appeals, individuals whose registration is reduced back to its pre-2011 length could end up having their registration go back to life. Furthermore, there are likely to be legislative amendments to SORA. Individuals could spend a lot of money challenging registration obligations without any long-term result if they file now rather than once Does v. Snyder is final.
The one exception to this general principle is for individuals who would already have come off the registry under the pre-2011 version of SORA (e.g. a person who has already been on the registry 25 years, or in some cases for 10 years after release from prison). Counsel may wish to consider filing for immediate removal from the registry since a decision in such a case could become final before the decision in Does v. Snyder becomes final. If possible, counsel should negotiate a stipulated order for removal with the prosecutor in the state criminal case. If such stipulated relief in state court is not possible, counsel should consider filing an affirmative civil action in federal court where the Sixth Circuit’s decision is binding. Such an action should name the Michigan State Police director in her official capacity as a defendant.
She is the Same person who wrote that memorandum on 12-20-17 Director Heidi E. Washington.
so since SCOTUS has basically ruled in 6th’s favor and ours and nothing has been modified the ruling should apply to EVERYONE NOT JUST THE ORIGINAL SIX. Does that sound correct because if it is I am going to bring ALL this up to the MSP SOR unit who is in charge of the registry and the director, any thought’s on this before I call them. Thanks in advance everyone.
Has anyone heard anything back recently this month on this from ACLU, etc? The new Attorney General has now taken office, and they should be starting to make some progress on this. Either the state is going to make changes or they are not. The ball should be rolling right now.
Looking on the Michigan’s legislature website, when SORA was re-written in 2011, the bill was introduced in February 2011 and it became signed law two months later in April 2011, with effective date July 2011. In 2019, it should not be taking them all year for for these changes. If no significant amount of progress is being made by this next month or so, the ACLU needs to just have the judge rule on the 2006 and 2011 amendments. The “good faith” means nothing if they are not serious about making changes, and im hoping the state is not using this “good faith” to keep postponing the court dates.
Hello Everyone and a Happy New Year to all
Well I call the Michigan State Police today and talked to some one one in their SOR unit, and demanded respectfully that i be removed from from the registry. I explained about the Does decision and of course she says it only applies to the original 6, and i said wrong. I even read her the memorandum, and then i even read this to her To Whom Will the Court of Appeals Decision Apply?
It is hard to know the answer to this question, because there is not yet a final judgment in Does v. Snyder. If the state seeks en banc review or petitions for certiorari, and if either the full Sixth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court accepts the case, another 8-15 months could pass before a final decision issues.
The case was brought only on behalf of the six named plaintiffs. However, if the Court of Appeals’ decision is not modified during further appeals, the court’s reasoning that the current version of SORA is punishment will apply to everyone whose offense was committed before July 1, 2011. The court’s reasoning that the geographic exclusion zones are punishment will apply to everyone whose offense was committed before January 1, 2006. The relevant date is the date of the offense, not the date of conviction. and of course she still says the law has not changed and they have to follow the law, bla bla bla.
Then i emailed the ACLU and sent them the same statement the one above, but have not heard back from them yet. I’m sure they will also come up with some excuse, about why the can is still being kicked down the road. They will probably also try to explain how that statement still does not apply to everyone.
Please correct me if i am wrong, but since the 6th’s decision was never modified in any shape way or form, wouldn’t that in fact apply that the 6th Circuit’s ruling does in fact apply to everyone.
Well as soon asi hear back from the ACLU, i will let everyone know what their response is back to me, i am also still trying to find a cheap or pro bono lawyer, i’m also trying to decide if i want to petition the court for removal on my own,still not sure how to go about that or were to find the proper forms. Any suggestions where i should begin or should i wait on the ACLU? Also has anyone else heard anything on the progress of the Does 2 lawsuit, or if Judge Cleland has held another hearing since he is supposedly suppose to check on the progress every 28 days. Thanks everyone.
Hi
Quick update i have been talking to Mr Reingold, and i just got an email back from him just minutes ago and this is what he said: You can talk to a criminal defense or civil rights lawyer about going to court to get Does I applied to you, which (depending on how much time, if any, you spent in prison) might also get you off the registry (at least pending the passage of a new statute). But that is not something I can do for you because (a) I’m not in a position to represent individual registrants, and (b) even if I were in private practice, I wouldn’t want to take your money for a fix that might come for free over roughly the same time span that it would take to go to court.
You are a member of the class in Does II, so either we will settle for a better new statute, or we will go back to federal court and get a decision, probably by the summer.
But if you want to move forward on your own, that is fine. You might also be able to find pleadings on line that have worked for other people and that would allow you to file in court without a lawyer, but I haven’t done such a case and don’t have model pleadings for you.
Good luck whatever you decide.
So i guess i will continue to wait and see if we get a final decision from the Federal Court this summer.
I just thought you all would like to know about what he just told me, keep your fingers crossed for a final ending to this in the summer.
Bobby
@Bobby
I haven’t been following the smaller court cases….I don’t know anything about either case you mentioned…if you can give me a brief synopsis on each one I can give you my thoughts