Judges refuse to enforce provisions of new sex offender law (with more about my visiting judge)
Here's an excerpt:
Visiting judge to hear sex offender appeals
ELYRIA — The Ohio Supreme Court has appointed a visiting judge to hear the appeals of Lorain County sex offenders who have been reclassified under a new federally mandated state law.Common Pleas Court Administrator Tim Lubbe said former Cuyahoga County Judge William Coyne will be assigned the appeals that have been pouring in since the state began notifying offenders late last year.
Under the new law — known as Adam’s Law for Adam Walsh, a 6-year-old Florida boy abducted and killed in 1981 — every state must impose uniform sex offender classifications by 2009 or risk losing federal money. Ohio’s version of the law took effect at the beginning of the year and requires that every sex offender in the state be reclassified....
To read the rest of this article by CT reporter Brad Dicken, please click here:
http://www.chroniclet.com/2008/01/24/visiting-judge-to-hear-sex-offender-appeals
And just as I was about to post this blog, I received an e-mail from a friend alerting me to a different article, with important news that I hadn't yet heard about the law, in today's Cleveland Plain Dealer, the largest newspaper in Ohio.
Here's an excerpt:
Ohio's new sex offender law draws rebuke from judges
Summit judges refuse to enforce provisions
Akron - Summit County judges will join their counterparts in at least four other Ohio counties in refusing to enforce provisions of the state's new, tougher sex-offender registration law.
The eight judges of Summit's general trial division will act this week to either issue a stay to block all of the affected cases from moving forward or issue a preliminary injunction in each case they hear.
At issue are a host of potential contradictions and constitutional questions arising from the state legislature's attempt to comply with the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act....
To read the rest of this Plain Dealer article, please click here:
http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/summit/120116716730070.xml&coll=2
For those of you unfamiliar with Ohio, I am in Lorain County, west of Cleveland. Summit County is southeast of Cleveland and includes the City of Akron. But what happens in other counties is still important, since all these cases will eventually, almost certainly, end up in the Ohio Supreme Court, which should then issue a unified ruling.
i hope city buddha won't be distressed that i've put nietzsche on hold for the time being to read the articles and absorb them them. bbl
Reply to this
I think the Buddha will understand. (-;
I've put other things on hold to digest, respond to, and forward these as well....
Reply to this
understandable
Reply to this
This sounds encouraging...is it??? It sounds like having the cases grouped together gives more chance for a stay...
But not I'm not very legal savvy. So don't always know all the ramifications...
All I can say is good luck... you have tons of support.
Chris
Reply to this
I think it's encouraging... especially the second article. I'm still a little nervous about my ultimate fate being in the hands of the Ohio Supreme Court, which tends to seem a bit too "conservative" for my taste. That said, I'm not really an expert. I'm learning as I go. Maybe this is a way to make the cases easier to deal with (in one clump) when they get to the higher court. But I definitely think it's encouraging that so many lower level judges (a majority perhaps) dislike this law. Usually when sex offender laws pass you get a few renegade judges who criticize them. But this time is different in that so many judges (many with reputations for being very mainstream) and so many law enforcement authorities are critical of Senate Bill 10. This will perhaps carry more weight than any offender's or defense attorney's constitutional argument would by itself.
Thanks for your friendship and support, Chris!
Reply to this
Fed government seems to do what it wants, coercing the states by withholding money it takes *from* the states.
Reply to this
Very good point, Kathy!
Reply to this