State v. Zerbe, 50 N.E.3d 368 (Ind. 2016)
Nature of Case: Appellant had been convicted in Michigan of a sex offense prior to either the enactment of Michigan’s SORN law or Indiana’s. Subsequently, he was required to register in Michigan.
Appellant thereafter moved to Indiana, which imposed registration requirements on people who moved in from out of state where the other state required the person to register. Appellant subsequently petitioned for removal in state court, alleging that Indiana’s application of SORN to him constituted a violation of his Ex Post Facto rights, given that Indiana had already declared its state SORN to be punitive.
The trial court granted the petition, which the state appealed. Indiana Court of Appeals reversed, and Appellant sought review from the Indiana Supreme Court, which was granted.
Holding: Indiana Supreme Court affirmed. The application of Indiana SORN did not violate Appellant’s constitutional rights. Despite the fact that Appellant had been convicted of an offense prior to the enactment of Indiana’s SORN, and that Indiana’s SORN was punitive, it was not an Ex Post Facto law. Indiana’s SORN imposed no punishment in excess of what was already required of Appellant in Michigan, and furthermore Indiana’s requirement was not triggered by his commission of a crime but rather the fact of his out-of-state registration.
- Indiana Supreme Court Opinion | view via Google Scholar
- Appellant’s Brief
- Appellee’s Brief
- Appellant’s Reply Brief