A man who was required to register as a sex offender because of a change in state law must continue to register even though his conviction occurred more than 25 years ago, Wyoming’s Supreme Court has ruled. …
At the time of his conviction, ____ was not required to register as a sex offender because the victim was over 16. However, state law changed in 2007 to require registration by those convicted of third-degree sexual assault regardless of the age of the victim. …
However, justices said ____ did not offer enough evidence to get the court to reverse itself on its ruling in the past that the registration requirement is not a punishment, but a regulatory burden.
“He has not convinced this court to overturn our holding that the (registration law) is not an ex post facto punishment …” Full Article
WOW! That’s some hardcore BS right there. So the registration duration is based on whenever the hell they decide to create a new law for it?
Just more evidence that the law has little to do with justice, and almost entirely about technical crap. No wonder young teens are being charged with producing child porn when they take nude selfies and people are sentenced to more time behind bars for literally doing nothing illegal than they served for their actual crime.
A plague upon all their houses!
It begs to ask the question what is the ‘real’ reason that that the entire L.E. community is in lockstep over this b.s. ruling?…Over 25 years of staying clean? How is this guy a continuing threat?
Someone…please enlighten me..
I see a potential avenue to challenge this.
I don’t know how to legally structure it, but basically, according to this ruling, if he does continue to register until 2034 per the ruling, completes it, and then in 2039 they pass a new totally-non-punitive regulation that now requires 50 years of registering for that same crime, that he’ll now once again be required to register for another 25 years, completely ignoring the 5 years in between when the previous law said he was done.
I currently see this as being completely valid in regards to being yo-yo’d on and off the registry based on whatever the hell the legislature wants, if they “accidently” don’t word it just right enough.
REGULATORY?
Precisely the purpose of Art.1 sec 9, 10- regulatory restraint on Congress! Simple Right!