North Carolina’s Supreme Court is re-evaluating whether forcing sex offenders to be perpetually tracked by GPS-linked devices, sometimes for the rest of their lives, is justified or a Constitution-violating unreasonable search.
The state’s highest court next month takes up the case of repeat sex offender Torrey Grady. It comes three years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in his case that mandating GPS ankle monitors for ex-cons is a serious privacy concern. Full Article
The first paragraph makes it sound like NCSC has had an epiphany and *wants* to revisit this. Hardly. It’s sad that the Appellate court below NCSC understands the Constitution, but the NCSC either doesn’t, or doesn’t care if it’s violated regarding “those people.”
I foresee this once again forcing the State to implement an individual risk assessment. That’s the recurrent theme I get from the various wins around the country. Maybe one of these days NC will wake up…but I doubt it.
As if we’re not headed toward the implanted micro-chip processor in humans.
From State v. Griffin in the NC Court of Appeals:
“The State tries to overcome its lack of data, social science
or scientific research, legislative findings, or other
empirical evidence with a renewed appeal to anecdotal case
law, as well as to “logic and common sense.” But neither
anecdote, common sense, nor logic, in a vacuum, is
sufficient to carry the State’s burden of proof. ”
That’s a direct quote from Doe v. Cooper in the 4th Circuit addressing premises restrictions. Not sure how the NC Supreme Court can overcome that reasoning. Think it would also be pretty hard to ignore it.
I am glad that he was able to get the ACLU to represent him I tried to get the ACLU to help me fight the retroactively of the Adam Walsh act in Rhode island which is known as sorna but instead of helping me they turned it into me asking for help of a privacy issue instead of a constitutional issue.I gave them muniz vs the commonwealth of Pennsylvania and also Doe vs commonwealth of Massachusetts with no luck of them help!ng me but they are always asking me for Donations fat chance of me helping them.
Like everything in the probation system, they are only effective on the people who choose to cooperate. Just Google Christopher Pinkard of Detroit. He had an ankle monitor on when he went on a violent crime spree, got a gun, robbed people, car jacked two cars, pistol whipped a person, led police on a chase, charged with multiple violent felonies, all while wearing an ankle monitor. There are many such cases. Ankle monitors prevent good people from adapting in society, they do little to stop true criminals.
@AJ When I was a small boy I watched my father. He was locking up with a chain and a padlock to a fence post his newly purchased camper. Since we lived in a very rural area I asked if that was supposed to keep someone from stealing it. My father with great wisdom replied “Son, I’m just keeping honest people honest”