ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021

General NewsNational

MT: Federal judge to rule on sex offender registration for ‘gay sex’ convictions

[kpvi.com – 3/30/21]

The Montana Attorney General’s Office opposed removing a former Missoula man from the state’s sexual offender registry despite evidence he was designated a sex offender because he had consensual “gay sex” when he was 18 years old.

At a trial held Tuesday before U.S. District Court Judge Dana L. Christensen, Assistant Attorney General Hannah Tokerud argued the case did not hinge on whether the man, Randall _____, was convicted for having consensual sex.

“It hinges on whether he is required to register in Idaho,” Tokerud said.

If any state requires a person to register as a sex offender, Montana will require that person to register, regardless of the facts of the case, Tokerud said.

Menges’ attorney, Matthew Strugar, argued that Montana is trying to “pass the buck” to another state while enforcing an unconstitutional registration requirement.

Strugar asked Christensen to order the state to stop requiring Randall _____to register, remove his name from the offender list and delete any state records related to his conviction.

Christensen did not rule on the case from the bench, but said he would get a ruling out “quickly.”

Read the full article

 

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.  
 
7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Depending upon how it is written, the decision in this case could have very important implications. As with some other states, Montana requires (since 2005) registration if registration was required for a conviction in another state. There is no requirement that the out-of-state offense would trigger registration if committed in Montana, nor even that the actions be unlawful in Montana. Not only does this policy raise equal protection questions, but also smacks up against the contention that registration is a public safety issue. Why would someone convicted of an out of state crime be presumed more dangerous than a resident… Read more »

Why not extend the equal protection to the IML demarcations? In some states, the legal age of consent is 16 years of age and in most others it is 18 years of age. How can an act be legal in one state, but the same act be illegal in another state?

Under the U.S. Constitution, the federal government and individual states define their own statutes and punishments. That is why it is possible to have both state and federal prosecutions for the same conduct, and it won’t be double jeopardy. The question then is one of jurisdiction. Each state has jurisdiction within its own boundaries and can’t prosecute crimes wholly committed in another. The feds can’t either unless they can create an interstate connection, or “nexus.” Much of that has been gained over the last 60 years by perverting (my opinion) the Constitution’s Interstate Commerce Clause. The feds alone have IML… Read more »

The IML is connecting all the states under one umbrella. Each state has its own registry, that defines who is a minor. Travelling outside the US, the IML doesn’t differentiate if you are from CA (legal consent of 18 yrs old) or NV (17 yrs old) or CT (16 yrs old) registrant. The IML is on a US passport, not a CA passport, or NV passport, or CT passport. If someone in CA is convicted of sex with a minor who is 17 years old, then that person must register, but not in NV or CT. Therein lies the equal… Read more »

The United States of America are not united. I don’t get it either new Person… how the “united” states have un-united laws. Makes no sense to me.

The IML is just a way to make life more painful for anyone on any registry for whatever conviction; e.g. statutory rape, child porn, or mooning. Since neither the registry nor the IML are considered punishment, equal protection violations are not as clear cut.

Each state can also determine how it wants to handle registrants who travel from other states. The primary issue in this Montana case centers around Lawrence v Texas. However, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the court will at least discuss the equivalency question.

Veritas.

7
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.