A man whose name was removed from Indiana’s Sex and Violent Offender Registry on the state’s volition has successfully sought rehearing at the Indiana Court of Appeals, which has now deemed his case moot. Full Article
Related posts
-
IN: Interesting Stay Dispute in Seventh Circuit Minors’-Access-to-Porn Case
Source: reason.com 8/20/24 From Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Rokita, decided Friday by Judges Frank Easterbrook... -
IN: Indiana HB 1307 would mean register for life if moving to Indiana
Source: thestatehousefile.com 1/18/24 The Indiana House Courts and Criminal Code Committee discussed several bills Wednesday, including... -
IN: Anderson arsonist told police he targeted child molesters’ homes, court docs reveal
Source: fox59.com 12/21/23 ANDERSON, Ind. — Court documents reveal that an Anderson man didn’t understand why...
This is such trash. I loath this legal conspiring to keep the registry in place. The courts constantly seem to find excuses to keep this crap in place (see ACSOL being denied a hearing on Covid registration because of a non binding “executive order” Newsom issued) . When this whole thing collapses, US needs to pay out serious reparations to millions
Good news in the end.
A possible reason this is good news rests in the fact McF. benefited from other rulings like Ohio v Carr & the NC case whereby federal judge ruled the necessity for process (judicial) when interstate movement has occurred from one state’s law is compared to the law in another. According to those opinions, the administrative branch in the current resident state does not have the authority practice comparative analyses of laws of different states on their own AND interpret them too. Much of judicial duty revolves around comparison of textual codified words & their meaning as applied to the individual case.
The key to u understanding this is acknowledging the registrant was removed at the behest of both his attorney & IN states’ attorneys! The registrant won his release from duty in IN, but demanded a rehearing (perhaps for getting jived in the 1st place by IN – included without McF. having notice of potential hearing about it ).
Here we see the influence of precedent used in IN that was first established by other registrants complaints in other states and judicial jurisdictions. Just a prime example of power of the electronic database infrastructure and it’s built in swallowing of traditional notion of individual sovereignty (Of states’ and of hu(man).
Remember Connecticut DPS rested upon same state “similarly situated” where no comparative text analysis was necessary- hence no notice of hearing thereby needed. 9-0.
IMPORTANT FACT: A signed voluntary waiver of right cannot cross state line because it is specific to the state that demanded it on the issue.
Harry
I didn’t even think to look at the increase of people added to the registry as young children or teens that get caught up in this mess. Well adults are blinded by fear and ignorance till it lands on their lap. Soon the registry will be more useless because half the country will be on it or know someone. Still believe that government officials need a good swift kick in the ass for all of their deceptions to the public!!