Source: ACSOL
The Michigan Supreme Court today issued a decision declaring that the state’s sex offender law adopted in 2011 cannot retroactively be applied to a registrant convicted two years earlier. The Court based its decision upon the ex post facto clauses of both the Michigan and the U.S. Constitutions.
“Today’s decision is a significant victory not only for the registrant involved in this case, but also for all Michigan registrants convicted prior to 2011,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “This decision can and should be used as a precedent in every state and federal court.”
In its decision, the Michigan Supreme Court found that the “aggregate punitive effects” of the state law “negated the state’s intention to deem it a civil regulation.” In addition, the Court found that the state law “bore resemblance to the traditional punishments of banishment, shaming and parole because of its limitations on residency and employment, publication of information and encouragement of social ostracism…” Further, the Court found that the law “appeared retributive” and “appeared excessive.”
At issue in the case were provisions of the 2011 law that created a tiered classification system as well as duties and requirements of each registrant based upon the registrant’s tier classification. One of those requirements was the publication of personal information on the state’s Megan’s Law website.
“The Michigan Supreme Court is to be commended for speaking the truth today in its decision,” stated Bellucci. “The court did not accept the government’s stated intention that its registration laws were civil regulations and instead examined closely the effect of those laws leading to the conclusion that the laws punished registrants.”
Download a PDF of the decision:
People v. Betts – Ex Post Facto – July 2021
This might be a big victory for us on Michigan registry….but…. remember there is also a federal registry. And your most likely on that, regardless of what Michigan does.
To give you an example of the cluster F*** here, Michigan will allow you to apply for your gun rights back after several years have past as a felon.
BUT…. The feds will arrest you, if your in possession, even if it’s ok in Michigan by Michigan laws to have your gun rights back.
So see the dilemma here?? It’s a great win no doubt, but we also have the feds to deal with. With more states getting on board, tackling the feds will be a breeze.
How will this effect anyone convicted of their offense prior to Megan’s international law , based on international travel ?
SADO handled this case and they don’t answer questions from individual registrants. A good attorney to contact in Michigan to see how Betts affects you is Nicole Blank at 248-515-6583.
I will post more on this decision when I get time.
Can we sue Michigan for damages? Major decisions in my life—where I work and where I live—were made based on laws that Federal and now state judges have ruled unconstitutional. My income and my children’s school district have been affected because I had to abide by an unconstitutional set of laws.
My question is if this is implemented, what would it mean if one has a conviction date from the year 2000 and was released in 2007? Would we be off the registry?
This is the best thing since sliced cheese. I was convicted in April 1993 before the registry was created. If I’m reading this opinion correctly, does it mean I never should have been forced to register? And the 2011 amendments which changed me from 25 years to life.
Thank God we have Supreme Court Justices who have common sense and understand the law.
Not take me off this damn punitive registry that has been punishing me for years!!!
Great outcome UCLA on the Betts case!!!!!!
Now if judge Cleland will use carbon copy paper on the does ll case, that will set the legislature back on track with the constitution!
I apologize for repeating my post from the FAC site, but I thought it could add to this thread.
*****************************
At some point the arguments used against the ex post facto application of registry laws should be directed at bills of attainder, which are mentioned in the same sentence of the constitution (Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.”)
Unlike ex post facto laws, bills of attainder are not predicated on any time frame, but merely prohibit punishment without due process. The key to both is the question of whether punishment is being applied extra-judicially. I defy anyone to find a sex offense statute that lists registration as part of the punishment. Statutes do require adequate notice. States and the feds have essentially considered Smith v. Doe as carte blanche to administratively apply any restrictions they choose. Recently, courts seem to be creating cracks in the punishment wall in these ex post facto cases.
However, as Janice Bellucci of ACSOL points out, timing is everything. A premature attempt to abolish the registry as a bill of attainder could result in a long-lasting negative decision as in Smith. To quote Porky Pig; “We must be vewy, vewy careful, hu, hu, hu, hu.”
Veritas.
Sounds good Michigan the registry is literally falling apart right before our eyes
Down here in California were still fighting the good old fight the DA office don’t wanna let registrants go free without Court hearings, LE is still running around with their task forces hunting down sex offenders for Couch Surfing because they cant afford a place to live and tier 3 offenders who’ve been left on the registry for life just off their convictions no risk assessment.
We still got along ways to go in California i just hope next year on my birthday i can petition and be done with all this BS
Good luck 🗣
It is great news, but putting a date on it is punitive! Once you’ve served your sentence, that should be the end of it.
In this case, the 2011 amendments completely restructured SORA through the imposition of a tiered classification system, and the duties and requirements of each registrant were based on that registrant’s tier classification. Removing the 2011 amendments from SORA would render unclear who was required to comply with the act, how long each registrant must comply, how many times annually each registrant must report to law enforcement, and what a registrant must show to petition for removal from registration. Outside the tiered classification system, certain discrete provisions of the 2006 and 2011 amendments—including the student-safety zones of MCL 28.733 to MCL 28.736, as amended by 2005 PA 121, and the in- person reporting requirements of MCL 28.725(1), as amended by 2011 PA 17—could be excised from retroactive application without affecting the statute’s workability. However, even if the retroactive application of SORA without these discrete provisions were constitutional, that application would require improper judicial engagement in essentially legislative choices. Furthermore, the passage of 2020 PA 295 did not support the prosecution’s proposed remedy for severing the 2011 SORA. Similarly, the proposal of amicus the Gratiot County Prosecutor’s Office to remedy the constitutional violation by excising the particular provisions of the 2011 SORA that extended beyond its federal counterpart, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), 34 USC 20901 et seq., was rejected. The fact that the 2011 Legislature did not amend SORA to create an identical statutory scheme to SORNA and instead included several additional provisions indicated that the Legislature was, at the very least, not motivated solely by a desire to conform to SORNA.
The last part is what I enjoyed the most. Almost seemed like they were giving the legislature the bird. But since their opinion stated that the 2011 amendments are not severable from SORA, does that mean that the entirety of SORA is not valid?
I only had time to read a few comments, but unless someone stated it and I missed it, people don’t understand the biggest benefit from this decision.
True, it currently directly affects those suffering ex post facto. BUT, by declaring registration punitive it now opens the floodgates for all other Constitutional challenges that before would lose immediately if registration is not punishment. Now, cruel and unusual punishment and due process can be challenged as well.
The court did not rule this why because they were being malicious and leaving a loophole for post 2011 registrants to remain on the punitive registry. They were presented a question by this one defendant and they answered THAT question. “Can the law be retroactively applied to someone years after he was convicted”. Their answer was “NO”. That was the only question presented to them. The question was not, “is the entire registry punitive and unconstitutional?”. They can only rule on the specific question presented to them. Even though they went into length in their opinion to discribe the registry as punitive in its entirety, that was not part of the decision on this particular case. The conclusion for this particular case is; This law cannot be retroactively applied, as that was what the defendant asked them.
Now if someone else would bring a challenge about the punitive nature of the registry, I suspect we would get a favorable ruling in that case as well based on how the court expresses that they find the entire registry to be a form of undue punishment in addition to the court ordered sentences.
Something that many people have overlooked is the fact that when SORA was first created, it’s intent was to be a tool for the police to use for investigating sexual assaults. If an assault happened in an area where someone on the registry lived, he would be one of the first suspects the police would investigate. That is what the registry was for.
Since then it has ceased to be a tool for police and has become, and I wince when I say this, a means to keep the public safe and to prevent the registered person from doing it again. We all know how stupid that is. Since when does having someone’s picture and information listed on the internet for the world to see keep the public safe? Since when does this prevent the registrant from committing another crime?
There is NOTHING anyone can do to prevent a crime. Even published laws do not prevent crime. We all know that. There are laws making it illegal to murder, but that doesn’t stop anyone. Look at how many murders there were in Detroit alone last year.
Did the Legislature enact a law against murder thinking that if its on the books, no one would ever commit murder? Does that law being on the books keep people safe from people who intend to murder? Of course not, and its stupid to even think so. So how do all these amendments to SORA “prevent” sexual assaults or keep the public safe? They don’t. I will never rape anyone, but having my name on the hit list would never stop me if I wanted to, therefore, the public can never be safe.
This is why the registry needs to be abolished. It does absolutely NOTHING to keep the public safe or to prevent crime. All it does is subject the people on it and their families to a life of misery and makes them a target to those who would seek to do them harm.
I’m going to go create a list now of everyone I can think of who has ever committed a crime and publish it on my YouTube channel so the public will be safe.
Its about time they STOP PUNITIVE PUNISHMENT UPON OUR FAMILIES TOO ! The state needs too pay for all the damage it has inflicted upon registrants and their families for the last 28 years unjustly ! I hope we can hold them responsible & accountable for the pain & suffering all of us had too endure . Another will and still se all sit here and suffer NO CHANGES !! This is Sick ! Those of us who were forced on this Hit list should of been free 28 years ago and we still are NOT !!
@@ Another WIN and still we all sit here and suffer “NO CHANGES” ? This is Sick ! The Court needs too step UP ! End these barbaric punishment’s they are allowing !
So here’s a thought/question for the legal-beagles on here and out there…
If MI’s SORA is punitive, will MI be able to apply it to someone moving in from out of state, regardless the date of their conviction? It would seem that even the boilerplate catch-all language of “if committed in this State” and such won’t help. I don’t see how a State can apply any punitive act upon someone who was not subject to the penalty while a resident of another state. After all, someone who committed an act in a state other than Michigan has violated no Michigan laws…and therefore cannot be punished by Michigan.
So now that MSC, has ruled on Betts favor and deemed the 2011 amendments unconstitutional and I know we are still waiting on Judge Cleland for some reason. Does anyone have a guess when they will start removing pre-2011 people from the registry. I’m not worried or could careless about the other provisions, I am just concerned with the part where those of us that were changed from 25 years to life will finally be removed from this damn thing. My so called 25 years was up last year. 6-19-2020. Anyone have any guesses? Thanks for your time in advance.
I’m still shocked riverside county public defenders office wouldn’t file my petition because I have 2 failure to register changes on my record I received probation on both changes and completed them bout why fo I have to wait 5 more years.I’m so angry I don’t know what to do anymore
I guess I’ma be homeless for the next 5 yearz
You have to remember we are dealing with multiple classes in the Law Suit. Those pre-2016, pre-2011, and Those pre-2006. My only concern is that the ACLU never addressed the length of time we had to register only the tiers. However, in People v. Betts did address that issue and stated that the 2011 amendments could not be applied retroactively as well as 2021 amendments to the ex post facto class. People v Betts did address the pre-2011 class.
Well…. I was wondering about that. And according to The Intern Tim, in the most recent emails sent out, the Bett’s case only applies to Bett’s, it is NOT class action. There fore another lawsuit has to be filed, another 2-3 yrs of waiting. The new 2020 Sora holds us ALL on it to register. And we’re required to register.
I knew it was too good to be true.
Prior to the 2011 law, did michigan have a lifetime registry?
Cant wait too file law suits on these A$$ Clowns ! The longer they retroactive punishment the more we will get PAID !
Ok so the new law in Michigan says it’s not retroactive. so if it’s not retroactive then what? @Disgusted in Michigan maybe you can help me on this part. I would really appreciate it thanks.
https://www.mied.uscourts.gov/PDFFIles/16-13137DoesFinalJmt.pdf
If there’s a silver lining at all Cleland used the words punishment. But whatever. I’m over this cat and mouse game.