ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings [details]
10/20 – Los Angeles, 11/17- Phone, 12/08 – San Diego

Emotional Support Group: (Los Angeles): 10/27, 11/24, 12/22 [details]

Registration Laws for all 50 States

National

NV: Nevada to embark on new sex offender registry system, but critics say it’s overly harsh

Las Vegas attorney Alina Shell represents sex offenders, and she said it’s been an emotional time in recent weeks among clients calling her office.

Starting Oct. 1, Nevada will be implementing its version of the federal Adam Walsh Act, a law that significantly changes the way the state classifies its more than 7,200 sex offenders. Rather than categorizing them according to their projected risk of reoffending, they’ll be categorized according to the original crime they were convicted of — a process that will reshuffle thousands of them and lead to many having their names, addresses and pictures on a web-based sex offender registry for the first time. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Facts should matter

    “The attitude about sex offenders is never going to change.”

    Finally! Someone said it!

  2. j

    ( im confused )And people who were released from registering because enough time had elapsed since their crime will once again be subject to reporting requirements? if time has past and no need to register – why would the individual need to re-register?

    • AO

      @J – Because SCOTUS has ruled that registering isn’t punitive but regulatory. It basically means that it’s not punishment but more of a civil regulation like speed limits. They can change the rules whenever they want and there’s no recourse since the constitution deals with punishment not regulations. So until SCOTUS rules that the registry is punitive as a whole, no registrant will ever be truly free from the registry.

    • GRR

      Because AWA is more stringent then the previous Nevada laws. That is what all this BS is about. The Feds (Legislators) basically are changing and adding new laws.

  3. FinallyOffTheReg

    This “gerrymandering” of the Tiers as described is frightening. Lives are going to be destroyed, jobs lost, relationships broken, and good persons who have made a mistake a long time ago thrown back into the endless abyss. What does this accomplish? It’s the ongoing insanity from which few escape. I am blessed to be in a Northeast “Blue” State that after my enrollment as a RC after 10 years (early termination under SORNA Tier 1), “happily” kicked me off the Reg with a nice formal and official letter to confirm such. But THIS? It calls into my mind the great and wholly apropos Ayn Rand quote:

    “…The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”

    From: Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

  4. Two States East

    My deep lamentation of sorrow: As I was listening to my country radio station this morning they observed a minute of silence for what happened exactly one year ago today in Las Vegas, Nevada. All the country stations in the USA observed the minute of silence too.

    And yet here on October 1st we have our own tragedy to mark: Nevada starts implementing the Adam Walsh Act. Is it cruel and callous of me to even DARE to mention these two tragedies in the same comment ? Probably.

    I could go on and on, but the fact remains: We ALL remember the day our names became public. And these thousands of Nevadans will remember this day, October 1st. Probably for the rest of their lives.

  5. troy

    funny,state of Nevada moved me from tier 1to tier 3 for the severity of my crime hmmmm I heared that one from the nys parole board when they gave me 18 months out of a poss 24months TALK ABOUT DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND stepping on my rights

    • David

      @ Troy: Just as it is not “torture”, but instead “enhanced interrogation”, it’s not “punishment”, it’s “enhanced regulation”.
      (A legislative cesspool by any name stinks the same! 😡)

  6. RsoWife

    From what I understand in the article is that they made this retroactive from when the bill was passed. I hope this is fought in Navada like it was in Pa. The retroactive part was found unconstitutional. My husband went from a tier lll to a tier l. I hope lawyers in Navada can use Pa arguement and laws to their advantage. I think it was thr state vs Munz. Not 100% sure. The fight needs to be carried on. I’m a part of war. Women against the regestry. I know first hand what the regestry can do. My husband was told by a temp service that they could not hire him for any of the jobs they had listed just because he was on megans law. This is going to destroy so many lives.

    • A

      @rsowife
      You mentioned your husband went from tier III to Tier I……….if he is a tier I he is not on websites now right? Also you said temp services can’t hired him, is that even at tier I? But are you in NV or PA?
      Ps I’m in NV. :’(

      • Tired of this

        I’m guessing she meant to say TO tier 3 FROM tier 1? I don’t imagine anyone is going down in level. There seems to be numerous reports of people going up to tier 3 here.

  7. S in nevada

    Has anyone ever thought about suing the actual website itself that is posting these images and pictures. Especially in ex post facto cases. You should be able to sue the website for civil Liberties violations. And unconstitutionality. Look at the website that host your violations. Then look at the website name. Then go to iana.Org. You can look up all of their information for who and where to sue for your attorneys. You may not be able to beat the law or the state. But you should be able to beat anyone who is putting your information out there. In most cases it’s not the actual state.

  8. Feeling sad

    Everyone!!!! Lets file with the ACLU!!!! THIS IS AGAINST OUR RIGHTS AND THEY HAVE HELPED IN OTHER STATES!!!! WHOS WITH ME???

  9. A Nevadian

    This is my own personal experience in one county in rural Nevada, so take it with a grain of salt. No one seems to know how this law is supposed to work. The clerk who handled my paperwork and the deputy who took my prints both told me they are just winging it because the instructions they have are vague. I was also told that they are NOT doing direct community notification because there is no longer any law that requires it, and they don’t have the man power anyway. You still have to mail it in yourself, or at least my local sheriffs department thinks it’s still my responsibility to mail it in, so not much has changed. When I called the records bureau in Carson they told me that they didn’t know if I was supposed to mail it myself or not but if they gave me the prints and paperwork I better do it. They also told me to get a receipt because they don’t know how long it will take to process the renewals.

  10. A

    Well, it’s almost been two weeks since the worse day in history happened. Recently told no lawyer could help us at this point…….federal lawsuits are going on with no light at the end of the tunnel. Other state lawsuits are going wild again with no light at the end of the tunnel yet.
    This is a day to day battle emotionally mentally and physically at times watching my husband go through his ups and downs over this devastating re-punishment again. It takes its toll at times and it’s not fully two weeks.
    I know we aren’t the only ones on this ordeal but it feels like it at times.
    Please I’d love to know if anyone else has made any progress on anything anywhere. And I’d really like to know if anyone has dealt with any back lash from public over the released info on 10/1??? Is anyone aware of flyers or mailings going out to neighbors or etc?? Or just the website is all that has been published??

    TIA
    A

    • Tired of this

      I’m in Reno, so this affected me as well. Went from tier 1 to 2. Third party websites (city-data so far) are starting to scrape the state registry and repost the offender profiles. I wish I had a significant other at my side through this, because I have been an absolute wreck lately with nothing but an empty apartment (and alcohol) to hear my cries. I would be lying if I said I haven’t been contemplating suicide…it just all seems so pointless and hopeless. At least if I had a family of my own, it would be worth continuing the fight. I’ve decided to move out of state, which is about all I can do. Sucks to have to give up the relative stability that I’ve managed to build here, with a cheap apartment where they didn’t background check me and a job where they didn’t ask too many questions either. But I know that I cannot live like this, cannot live with a target on my back, cannot live with the knowledge that I could be outed (or worse) at any time and lose the job, apartment, or both. Better to leave with good references. So, I’ll be gone come November. I’m moving to a more reasonable state where I at least won’t be public.

      • Feeling sad

        @tired of this
        If we were to move would the tier 3 follow my husband or would it go by what state we move too? Would they reclassify him?

        • Tired of this

          No, his tier 3 would not follow him. Classification and public disclosure is up to the individual states. If his crime was not violent or predatory, Oregon might be a good choice. They only publish level 3 / predatory offenders on the website and they seem to have pretty strict criteria as to who gets classified as level 3 or predatory (it’s not just offense-based). Oregon is also not an AWA state.

        • Mike G

          @Feeling Sad

          Better investigate well the state you plan to move to. I decided to move back to Utah (where I was born) to escape California’s lifetime registration (Utah is only 10 years, or at least, was then) only to find that Utah law requires move-ins be held to the same requirements as imposed by the state they moved from, so I would still have to register for life!

    • Feeling sad

      @A
      My husband was told they will not be notifing people of this change, he called the number on the paper that came in stating he is now a tier 3. They told him they would put out communiry notification bc idk if i believe them.
      Did you call draskovich? He wont help you? My husband got a number from McLetchie and shell that helps you find a lawyer you need
      Email me
      Tprotska7@gmail.com
      Maybe we can give yoh that number and help you guys too

      • @feeling sad A

        We met with Draskovich on Friday and he said at this point there is nothing he can do and if any attorney told us otherwise they would be lying. He seems bothered and upset about the situation himself my husband felt. Draskovich advises that he was involved on a federal legal case but nothing more said. I couldn’t get an answer as to why he couldn’t help either which was frustrating and bothering. I tried to stay strong but at that moment I became weak it was embarrassing.
        I feel it’s all a stay still for some reason but another part feels it has the do with upcoming BS elections too. No one wants to do or say anything at this point because of votes or whatever!! But I honestly don’t know.
        I was baffled that the meeting was a dead end with no alternative or answer as to why.
        McLetchie office called back but advised they can’t help either, they said case overload. But I’d think that more people involved in a case is better then individuals.
        Based on comments here and other places about lawsuits everywhere else that yes they are filed, will be or have been heard but can take years to hear results or see any movement so how does that help anything???

        People say moving out of state, but to where?? Move then have that state change laws to then back in the same situation? Can’t just keep running……..money doesn’t grow on trees and being established it difficult to up root too.

        You said the Draskovich was already handling your case. Did you start with him before all this took place? Has he advised any progress or that he can in fact help you?
        Just want to know what to expect or if I’m doing things wrong.

        We told him we filed with ACLU too and his reaction came across like that was pointless.

        • Feeling sad

          @A
          We have been working with drasovich for about 2 years now. He helped my husband get off lifetime supervision. We were told the lawyers are doing everything they can and that he needs to comply with the law and we will be notified of any changes. We told draskovich we dont care what it takes we want to fight.We also told him we filled with the ACLU and he said good. He didnt say too much which yes it was frustrating but maybe hes not allowed to say anything. Idk im not sure Mcletchies office also gave us a number to call and an appeals attorney has gotten back to us. We have to make an appointment with him. Im not sure of his name though. My husband knows but hes at work right now. All i know is i believe the constitutionality of this whole thing is being fought in state court. Yes it can take a while but the way i see it its better than nothing.

  11. The Projected Alternative

    “Rather than categorizing them according to their projected risk of reoffending . . .”

    ——-

    As if categorizing by projected ‘. . . risk of reoffending . . .’ would be a better alternative. Which in theory, it would—except for the fact that ‘risk’ is too often defined by bogus, so-called ‘risk assessment,’ instruments like the Static-99R.

  12. mike r

    It sounds like you guys are doing everything you can possibly do to try and understand this BS in Nevada, I do not know of anything else you could really be doing except to be checking, but you probably already, if so let me know, whether this law has been challenged in state court. I do not know anything about this involving Nevada so I do not know if that is how this case started or what. Even if federal court say its constitutional does not mean crap to State supreme courts. Sure they look at it and can be persuaded by it but they give much more protections under state constitutions. That is the only other thing I can see happening besides what is already going on with the McLatchie lawyers case. Just because Nevada SC lifted the TRO does not mean they decided the case or even indicate how they would decide the case. They implicitly stated in the lift ruling that there was not enough record to go on, so I assume (although you know what assuming gets you, lol) it has not been presented to or adjudicated in a state court, other then the application for the actual TRO. TROs, as a matter of fact, are a high bar to achieve in the first place, this to me indicates that the state SC, on the face of the application, thought there was enough to issue that TRO so they must have had serious questions but it was just not there in any record for them to look at. Their reasoning for lifting it is unclear to me. It is confusing on what stages and what courts they are talking about without being very familiar with the case. The court states the following:
    “In seeking relief from the district court’s denial of their
    application for a temporary restraining order to enjoin the implementation
    of A.B. 579, petitioners challenge the constitutionality of A.B. 579.
    “Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that writ
    relief is warranted. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; see also Pan v. Eighth
    Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004)
    (“Petitioners carry the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is
    warranted.”). Further, we note that because the district court order at issue
    is the denial of an application for a temporary restraining order, the record
    below is not sufficiently developed for judicial review. CI Pan, 120 Nev. at
    229, 88 P.3d at 844. Accordingly, we lift the stay imposed by this court on
    July 1, 2016,”
    Did the lawyers ask the federal court for a TRO so the SC reconsidered their stay for some reason? The SC states it lifted the stay imposed by this court. Do they expire or something? The case has not been decided. I just do not understand why they would just lift it until some kind of decision was handed down. I thought that was the foundation on how a TRO works…

Leave a 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 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 *