Farmer v. Swearingen (N.D. Fla 2016)
Florida federal trial court dismissing complaint alleging that Florida’s practice of perpetual registration of extraterritorial registrants was unconstitutional.
Doe v. Virginia State Police (4th Cir. 2013)
4th Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the dismissal of civil rights complaint challenging’s Doe’s reclassification as a sexually violent offender on standing, ripeness, and Procedural Due Process grounds.
Doe v. State (Alaska 2008)
Alaska Supreme Court Opinion finding, on statute constitutional grounds, that its sex offense registration scheme violated the prohibition on retroactive punishments.
Doe v. O’Donnell (N.Y. App. Div. 3d. 2011)
New York Appellate Division affirming the decision of a trial court dismissing an administrative appeal wherein a former New York resident was required to continue registering as a sex offender in New York.
Doe v. Jindal (E.D. La. 2015)
Federal trial court in Louisiana dismissing a lawsuit alleging violations of Due Process and Equal Protection based on treatment of out of state conviction.
Connecticut Dept Public Safety v. Doe (2003)
United States Supreme Court Opinion holding that individuals required to register as sex offenders are not entitled to a hearing prior to registration to determine dangerousness, as dangerousness was not relevant to the statutory scheme.
Commonwealth v. Thompson (Ky. 2018)
Kentucky Supreme Court opinion finding that failure to advise as to sex offense registration in the context of a guilty plea constitutes deficient performance under the Sixth Amendment.
Commonwealth v. Wilmer (Mass. 2018)
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reversing a decision of the trial court which found that two convictions arising from the same proceeding required sex offense registration.
Doe v. Toelke (Mo. 2012)
Missouri Supreme Court opinion reversing a state trial court finding that Missouri’s SORA violated as-applied ex post facto prohibitions.
Lacy v. Butts (7th Cir. 2019)
7th Circuit Court of Appeals holding that Indiana’s treatment program for people incarcerated for a sex offense violated the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Bostic v. D.C. Housing Authority (D.C. Ct. App. 2017).
District of Columbia Court of Appeals opinion holding that the eviction of an individual who was convicted of a 1982 offense and subject to lifetime registration as a sex offender was proper in that it was not contrary to HUD regulations, and was not otherwise preempted.
Gonzalez v. Annucci (N.Y. 2018)
New York Court of Appeals holding that Department of Corrections and Community Supervision complied with statutory duty to assist people convicted of sex offenses in obtaining housing that was compliant with New York’s Sexual Assault Reform Act.
Commonwealth v. Feliz (Mass. 2019).
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts holding that state statute requiring the imposition of GPS monitoring as a condition of probation was unconstitutional in the context of the case of an individual who was convicted of non-contact sexual offenses.
Park v. State (Ga. 2019)
Georgia Supreme Court holding that lifetime GPS monitoring of individuals designated as sexually violent predators under state law is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
Iowa v. Aschbrenner (Iowa 2019)
Iowa Supreme Court Opinion affirming the conviction of Appellant who was charged with violating Internet Identifier reporting requirements over challenges based on Ex Post Facto Clause and First Amendment grounds.
Ex Parte Odom (Tex. Ct. App. 2018)
Texas Court of Appeals affirming the trial court’s denial of a constitutional challenge to a provision of Texas law that requires people required to register as sex offenders also register their internet identifiers.
Does v. Simi Valley et. al. (C.D. Cal. 2012)
Federal district court granting application for temporary restraining order, enjoining local authorities from enforcing ordinance that would have forced those required to register to place a sign on the exterior of their homes on Halloween that there was no candy at the residence.
United States v. Paul (6th Cir. 2017)
Conviction for federal failure to register affirmed where Defendant-Appellant was not required to register as a sex offender under Tennessee state law, traveled internationally, then continued to not register on his return.
Doe v. Swearingen (N.D. Fla. 2017)
District Court finding Florida statute requiring public registration of someone who was not required to register and convicted out of state unconstitutional under Equal Protection clause.
Doe v. DeWine (6th Cir. 2018)
6th Circuit Opinion holding that individual has no Procedural Due Process Right to challenge classification as a Sexual Predator where that designation is not material to state law.
Litmon v. Harris (9th Cir. 2014)
9th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion affirming the dismissal of a civil rights lawsuit alleging that California’s “sexually violent predator” designation violated a variety of constitutional rights.
In re Z.B. (S.D. 2008)
South Dakota Supreme Court holding that the registration requirement for certain juvenile sex offenders, which did not provide the same opportunity provided to adults who commit same offense to have names removed from registry if they obtained suspended imposition of sentence, violated equal protection.
In re McClain (N.C. Ct. App. 2013)
North Carolina Court of Appeals holding that the state legislature’s attempt to bring North Carolina’s conditions for removal from the sex offender registry in line with federal standards did not constitute an unlawful delegation of authority, and that evidence was sufficient to support the Superior Court’s denial of offender’s petition.
In re CK (N.J. 2018)
New Jersey Supreme Court opinion holding that subjecting juveniles to more onerous registration requirements than those imposed on adults violates substantive due procress..
Murphy v. Raoul, No. 16- cv–11471 (N.D. Ill. 2019)
Northern District of Illinois federal trial court holding that Illinois Department of Corrections policies for continuing to imprison people who were unable to obtain lawful housing was not constitutional.
Shaw v. Patton (10th Cir. 2016)
10th Circuit opinion rejecting as-applied Ex Post Facto challenge to Oklahoma SORN.
State v. Clemens (Neb. 2018)
Nebraska Supreme Court holding that, under plain reading of state law, anyone who was required to register in another jurisdiction would also be required to register in Nebraska.
State v. Davis (Ga. 2018)
Georgia Supreme Court opinion holding that pardon from Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles relieved defendant of requirement that he abide by state SORN law.
State v. Grady (N.C. Ct. App. 2018)
North Carolina Court of Appeals holding that, absent evidence of effectiveness, imposing GPS monitoring on person required to register would be a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
State v. Griffin (N.C. Ct. App. 2020)
North Carolina Court of Appeals holding that in light of prior precedent, where state offers no evidence that GPS monitoring is effective in preventing crimes, imposing it on defendant is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.