Community Notification Surprise

This past Sunday's paper included a supplemental flyer issued by the Brevard County Sheriff Department, it's purpose to serve as another form of community notification regarding area sex offenders.

With an oh no and in full anticipation of a ruined day, imagine our surprise to find residents labeled as sexual predators listed, I'd say about 25 or so, if that. Those local persons deemed sex offenders by the State of Florida were not included in the listing as in previous years.

I'm almost afraid to ask what brought about such a change. Can't be the economy as my understanding is funds garnered through drug enforcement pays all costs associated with getting out the word on your identified neighbors.

All I know is my Sunday was much brighter than years past. But never far from my mind were those featured as meeting the state's criteria for designation as sexual predators.

Knowing how this state works its punitive magic, I would suggest that upon learning a sexual predator lives in your neighborhood, get a police report in effort to make your own informed assessment.

And once you do, be aware how much remains unknown about the rest of your neighbors.

Ron Book Called Out by Broward County

Well.



Someone else has noticed a certain lobbyist bating for both teams.



The Miami Herald, Ron Book agrees to stop lobbying for pretrial measure (3/23/10):

(...)

Flagged by Broward officials for a conflict of interest, county lobbyist Ron Book has agreed to stop pushing for a new state law that county officials say would seriously undermine Broward's pretrial intervention program and cost local taxpayers millions.

The new law is being sought by another of Book's clients, the Florida bail bond industry. It would restrict access to county-run pretrial release programs by establishing new, statewide eligibility requirements for defendants seeking to get out of jail, forcing the county to spend more in keeping inmates behind bars.

County support for the pretrial program has wavered over the years; nevertheless, critics say Book should not be involved in representing the bail bond industry on the issue. ...

At Tuesday's commission meeting, Commissioner Lois Wexler said that, if passed, the law would ``decimate'' local pretrial release programs and place huge financial burdens on counties across the state.

Wexler added that she wants her money's worth from the lobbyist that many consider to be the most influential in Florida.

Broward commissioners passed an ordinance in January 2009 restricting access to the program run by the Broward Sheriff's Office. The proposed change in state law would further tighten the bondsmen's noose on the pretrial program.

``I guess the bail bond companies didn't get richer or increase their bottom line enough by what we did a year and a half ago, so now they're going in for the kill,'' Wexler said in an interview.

``This bill makes money the determination of justice,'' said Broward Public Defender Howard Finkelstein.

(...)

Book may be out of the legislative game on the pretrial detention bill, but his sympathies were clear in a parting shot Monday at Finkelstein -- his chief Broward antagonist.

``Public policy is on our side. And contrary to what Howard Finkelstein thinks, nobody died and left him in charge of what's right and wrong in this world,'' Book said.

This isn't the first time Book's work for the bail industry has put him at odds with his clients at county hall.

The January 2009 vote was accompanied by intense behind-the-scenes lobbying and public controversy. And 11 years ago, Book apologized when Broward commissioners asked him to explain why he had pushed a bill that would have weakened the county's pretrial detention program and cost the county millions.

Yet, eleven years later, he's still employed by Broward County. Book earns $53,000 a year plus $2,000 in expenses to lobby in Tallahassee.



Peruse the rest of Book's client list here.

Our House is a Very Fine House

I took the plunge back into the home buyers market, except this time, weighed down by the burden of residency restrictions due to my family member's designation as a sex offender.

The Internet is a great tool for "walking through" houses online sans realtor, who would likely grow suspicious about continued disinterest in seemingly great homes. Once I saw something that looked decent, I'd google map the address against all possible off-limit areas and then jump in the car to physically drive by the place, measuring distance via my car odometer. It took about three months, but his method turned up three legal houses of interest. Before contacting a realtor, I contacted local law enforcement to officially okay the possible choices.

One house out of the three met the restriction as stipulated by current state law.

One.

Believe it or not, it was a pretty great house, but the police asked us if we knew undesirables (homeless) often camped in the woods across the street. (Hugely ironic, as a) "undesirable" is term is usually reserved for my family member and b) the law put us there, segregating our home search to certain areas of town.

All bets were on this house. We had to like the place, it had to pass a home inspection and of course, the seller had to accept our offer.

After the seller turned down our first offer, we went back and gave her full price, knowing we had no choice due to the limitations imposed, all the while, keeping our fingers crossed that the place wouldn't be sold out from under us. Thankfully, the "undesirables" helped out in the end as the offer was accepted without any competing offers. The home loan went through as well as the closing and we breathed a huge sigh of relief.

Here's the punchline. If the law had stipulated an oft cited potential distance of 1750 feet--instead of the current state law of 1000 feet--a park located around 1200 ft. would've disqualified our new home as a possibility.

I would like to add, that if my children had been of school-age, my new neighborhood would not have been the best as far as neighborhood schools and the area of town is, let us say, "tired". Day labor is within a mile, so lots of foot (and men on bicycles) traffic travel through the neighborhood. My twenty-something son stumbled across a man unconscious on the sidewalk a couple of weeks back. My point is that many young kids are placed in similar unsafe situations because one of their parents is relegated to living within this law.

I want to keep these kids safe as well.

I've been involved long enough to know reforms won't change overnight. But I will say, the public has been very much educated on what constitutes a "sex offender" as more and more "typical" citizens find themselves (and their families) involved in these laws.

While most continue to stick their heads under a bridge and have failed to take responsibility for the collateral damage associated with these laws, I challenge Florida lawmakers to step back and question how better to address the issue before them now.

***

SB 1284 is listed on Committee Agenda for 3/23/2010, 1:00 PM, 412-K.

The bill preempts certain local ordinances related to residency limitations and provides for repeal of such ordinances.

Gather Around, Kids. Once Upon a Time the Julia Tuttle Causeway was NOT a Child Safety Zone

Well.

How interesting is this?

Didn't take Miami too long to figure out just how to link child safety zones with the the city's new residency restrictions of 1750 feet, effectively hamstringing the Florida Department of Corrections from assigning homeless citizens designated as sex offenders the address of Julia Tuttle Causeway, Miami, Florida.

The Miami Herald, Brickell residents will soon get new park (3/14/2010):

Residents along Brickell Avenue will see more green space coming their way by year's end.

Thanks to a collaboration between the Hollo family and Commissioner Marc Sarnoff, there will soon be a new park at 1814 Brickell Ave.

Earlier this year, the city of Miami bought the one-acre parcel for $2.6 million and the Hollos contributed a further $200,000, said David Karsh, a spokesman for Sarnoff.

The green space is coming at a crucial time, as more people make downtown Miami their home. A study by the Miami Downtown Development Authority and Goodkin Consulting/Focus Real Estate Advisors found that nearly three-quarters of the 22,079 condo units built since 2003 are occupied. The area spans the Brickell district south of downtown Miami to the Julia Tuttle Causeway.

Possible features of the park include shaded rest areas, a tot lot, dog park and walkways.

Sarnoff said he got the idea for a park in 2008, when he saw that none of the impact fees Miami had collected were being spent in District 2. Impact fees come from building permits and are meant to offset the costs associated with new projects.

(...)

Sarnoff is exploring creating another park in the north end of his district in the Little River area.

``We are looking at a piece of property there,'' he said.

Hmmm. I wonder what's out Little River way that the city may feel the DOC would consider a potential address?

Enjoy this review of events leading up to the latest puzzle piece sliding into place.

(...)

In January, Miami-Dade commissioners passed a sex offender ordinance that repeals more than 24 different sex offender laws enacted by municipalities within the county's borders. The new law creates one standard that commissioners hope will balance the need to protect children while still giving housing options to sex offenders and predators.

The ordinance also creates a new provision that supporters say is a more workable and realistic solution to protecting children: child-safety zones.

Under the child-safety zones, sex offenders are prohibited from loitering within 300 feet of where children congregate. In other words, it restricts sex offenders from being near children, but doesn't leave them homeless.

--Miami Herald, Julia Tuttle Causeway sex offender enclave being dismantled, (2/26/10)

Time to File a Civil Rights Complaint?

I can't shake this feeling that perhaps a civil rights complaint could be filed by the family members of those citizens designated as sex offenders by the state of Florida.

Due to the immediate access to the Florida Sex Offender Registry by anyone with a computer, private citizens who have done nothing but stand in support of their registered loved one, risk ostracization in their public, familial and employment life due to the listing of their home address online.

Follow my thinking, using the DOJ Civil Rights Division criteria as a guide.

Who is charged:		Usually an organization: Florida Legislature
Standard of proof:		Preponderance of evidence: FSOR
Fact finder:		Judge
Victim:		Individuals and/or representatives of a group or class: Family members
Remedy sought:		Correct policies and practices, relief for individuals: Removal of home addresses, maps from the FSOR
Govt's right to appeal:		Yes

If there is no violence or threat of violence, whom should I contact? A. If no violence is involved, complaints should be submitted in writing to the Civil Rights Division, where it will be forwarded to the appropriate Section for review. The Division's mailing address is: Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20530 Q. What do I do when my civil rights have been violated, and can I make a complaint on behalf of someone else? Must it be in writing? A. Individuals may report possible violations on their own or on behalf of others if they have sufficient first-hand information about the incident. The information provided should include names of the victim( s), any witnesses, and the perpetrators (if known), a description of the events, and whether any physical injuries or physical damage were incurred. Complaints in writing are preferred, but there may be circumstances when a telephone complaint is appropriate (especially if there is an immediate danger). The "blue pages" of your local telephone book should have the phone numbers and addresses for the agencies shown below.

And I believe a complaint can be made anonymously.

There is very much a reason our lawmakers will not legislate away the voting rights of RSOs (well, at least those who still retain voting rights). Doing so is a civil rights violation and nobody wants a civil rights complaint breathing down their neck.

What do you think, Froggers?

I'm listening.

Severable

While perusing the latest version of CS/HB 119 (read for the 1st time 3/9/10), the last couple of sections of the bill popped out at me.

(...)

(1846)Section 15. The Legislature intends that nothing in this
(1847))act reduce or diminish a court's jurisdiction.

(1848)Section 16. If any provision of this act or its
(1849)application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the
(1850)invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of
(1851)this act which can be given effect without the invalid provision
(1852)or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are
(1853)declared severable.

Nothing in this act reduces or diminishes a court jurisdiction.

And if any provision is held invalid, it doesn't effect any other provisions of the act.


Sounds sort of promising, doesn't it? As if the Florida Legislature were granting judges some sort of discretion within the law.

In the case of my family, a judge ruled my loved one was not a sex offender and that sex offender probation need not apply; however, had we known (hell, if the attorney had known) that a solicitation conviction under F.S. 800.04 carried the same weight as if an actual lewd and lascivious act had occurred, I guarantee our attorney would've asked for a continuance to plead down from any charge remotely connected with sex offender laws.

But you know what is said about hindsight....

So, I checked to see if F.S. 943.0436 was a cited statute in the creation of F.S. 856.022, the latest proposed addition to Florida sex offender law. It was not, no big surprise there.

In brief, F.S. 943.0436 legislatively removes the power of a judge to impose a fair and just sentence for first time (or otherwise) offenders, quite effectively stripping citizens from the right of legal due process. Why the law I affectionately refer to as the judicial handcuff has not been championed by the ACLU is beyond me.

I imagine that's what an appeals court is all about. That is, if one has enough money and enough of an ego to endure the humiliation.

What you (and your attorney) don't know about sex offender law can hurt you.

Has Government Neutralized Ex Post Facto Law?

An ex post facto law is a law passed after the occurrence of an event or action which retrospectively changes the legal consequences of the event or action.



Will the conclusion offered via the Brief for Law Professors in Support of Petitioner open the door for a much-needed legal clarification regarding ex post facto law?

Recently heard by the Supremes (2/24/2010): Carr v. United States, Docket No. 08-1301

(Argument Transcript here.)


(...)

29

CONCLUSION

While the petitioner’s brief makes a compelling
case for resolving this case in favor of Carr on statutory
grounds, there are significant reasons for the Court to address and resolve the Ex Post Facto Clause argument in favor of the petitioner as well.

Lower courts have created a complete mess of Ex Post Facto law in SORNA cases by confusing the rules of retrospectivity, as the Seventh Circuit did, deciding that a criminal statute with substantial prison penalties was not intended to be punitive, and that lengthy imprisonment and other restraints in SORNA are not punitive in effects. Especially because the Government has effectively neutralized the Ex Post Facto issues by not appealing any district court judgments where it lost the issue, this is an issue that should be addressed in the present matter. The Court should take this opportunity to restate the importance of the Ex Post Facto Clause and provide clear guidance to lower courts in addressing SORNA and other statutes. This will ensure that the Clause provides the necessary bulwark against ill-intentioned legislatures, maintains a proper separation of powers, and preserves the basic

30

right of fair notice. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals should be reversed.

Respectfully submitted.

COREY RAYBURN YUNG
John Marshall Law
School
315 S. Plymouth Ct.
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 386-2863

DOUGLAS A. BERMAN
The Ohio State University
Michael E. Moritz College
of Law
55 West 12th Ave.
Columbus, OH 43210
(614) 688-8690

WAYNE A. LOGAN
Florida State University
College of Law
425 W. Jefferson St.
Tallahassee, FL 32306
(850) 644.4759

AMY L. NEUHARDT
Counsel of Record
Boies, Schiller & Flexner
LLP
5301 Wisconsin Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20015
(202) 274-1137

Counsel for Amici Curiae

DECEMBER 9, 2009

Status Check: H119 and S1284

As the last of Miami's residents living beneath the Julia Tuttle Causeway are moved to safe shelter, (NBC, 3/4/10), let's review the progress of residency restriction bills currently before the Florida Legislature.

Senate 1284: Relating to Sexual Offenders and Predators [SPSC]

S1284 GENERAL BILL by Crist; Aronberg (Similar H 0119)

Sexual Offenders and Predators [SPSC]; Prohibits loitering or prowling
by certain offenders within a specified distance of places where
children regularly congregate. Preempts certain local ordinances
relating to residency limitations for sexual predators and offenders and
providing for repeal of such ordinances. Provides additional address
reporting requirements for sexual offenders adjudicated delinquent, etc.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2010.

01/20/10 SENATE Filed
02/03/10 SENATE Referred to Criminal Justice; Community Affairs; Judiciary;
Criminal and Civil Justice Appropriations
03/01/10 SENATE On Committee agenda-- Criminal Justice, 03/04/10, 8:00 am,
37-S
03/02/10 SENATE Introduced, referred to Criminal Justice; Community Affairs;
Judiciary; Criminal and Civil Justice Appropriations
-SJ 00092; On Committee agenda-- Criminal Justice, 03/04/10,
8:00 am, 37-S --Temporarily postponed
03/04/10 SENATE On Committee agenda-- Criminal Justice, 03/09/10, 3:30 pm,
37-S

***

House 0119: Relating to Sexual Offenders and Predators

H119 GENERAL BILL by Glorioso; (CO-SPONSORS) Brandenburg; Hooper (Similar
S 1284)

Sexual Offenders and Predators; Prohibits loitering or prowling by
certain offenders within specified distance of places where children
regularly congregate; prohibits certain actions toward child at public
park or playground by certain offenders; prohibits presence of certain
offenders at or on grounds of child care facility or pre-K through 12
school without notice & supervision, etc. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2010.

09/15/09 HOUSE Filed
10/12/09 HOUSE Referred to Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy (CCJP);
Military & Local Affairs Policy (EDCA); Criminal & Civil
Justice Appropriations (CGHC); Criminal & Civil Justice
Policy Council
01/26/10 HOUSE On Committee agenda-- Public Safety & Domestic Security
Policy (CCJP), 02/02/10, 8:00 am, 404-H --Workshopped
02/09/10 HOUSE On Committee agenda-- Public Safety & Domestic Security
Policy (CCJP), 02/16/10, 10:15 am, 404-H --Not considered
02/22/10 HOUSE On Committee agenda-- Public Safety & Domestic Security
Policy (CCJP), 03/01/10, 2:15 pm, 404-H
03/01/10 HOUSE CS by Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy (CCJP);
YEAS 11 NAYS 0
03/02/10 HOUSE Introduced, referred to Public Safety & Domestic Security
Policy (CCJP); Military & Local Affairs Policy (EDCA);
Criminal & Civil Justice Appropriations (CGHC); Criminal &
Civil Justice Policy Council -HJ 00018; On Committee agenda--
Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy (CCJP), 02/02/10,
8:00 am, 404-H --Workshopped; On Committee agenda-- Public
Safety & Domestic Security Policy (CCJP), 02/16/10, 10:15 am,
404-H --Not considered; On Committee agenda-- Public Safety &
Domestic Security Policy (CCJP), 03/01/10, 2:15 pm, 404-H; CS
by Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy (CCJP); YEAS 11
NAYS 0

And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

And have we been thrown
under the Bluebird once again?

Conflict of Interest? Rich Glorioso Accepts Check from Lobbyist Ron Book

As recently posted by Smashed Frog (Five Years after Jessica, 2/24/10):

(...)

State Rep. Rich Glorioso, R-Plant City, is sponsoring legislation to revamp Florida's sex offender laws by implementing a "circle of safety" to protect children instead of strong residency restrictions on sexual offenders. The main provision of the bill (HB119) would prohibit sexual offenders from loitering within 300 feet of locations where children are present.

"Sometimes we focus on where those people live," Glorioso said. "Where they are sleeping last night really isn't the issue. It's what they are doing when they are awake."

That being said...

(...)

Glorioso has been forced to modify bill HB119 as municipalities are a bit verklempt with the inclusion to preempt "...local residency restrictions on sex offenders, forbidding counties and cities from making barriers tougher than the 1,000-foot standard in state law.

Glorioso said that even though research shows the restrictions don't help, he plans to strike that part of his bill, blaming political opposition."

Just had to wonder if the same duo bopping around Florida talking up circles of safety (in addition to residency restrictions) to any interested municipality willing to listen, was somehow linked to the political opposition putting the screws to Glorioso's bill. (Smashed Frog, The Books Take Child Safety Zones on the Road, 2/5/2010).

Then the following Google alert popped up in my mailbox to help underscore all that is wrong with the Florida state legislature and why the people of this state are the Big Losers.

The Miami Herald, Florida Legislators Making Last Grabs for Money (3/2/2010):

(...)

Standing outside Clyde's & Costello's, Rep. Rich Glorioso, R-Plant City, accepted a check from South Florida lobbyist Ron Book.

``You have to raise money and it takes money to run a campaign,'' said Glorioso, who said the economy has hampered his fundraising. ``Businesses are struggling, so it's a tough year.'

Am I the only one making a connection here?