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.
State v. Habtai (Wash. Ct. App. Div. I 2018)
Washington Court of Appeals holding that, since state SORN was non-punitive, appellant was not deprived of right to jury trial when he was ordered to register, fact that neither plea nor element of the offense specified age of victim or biological relationship notwithstanding.
State v. Petersen-Beard (Kan. 2016)
Kansas Supreme Court opinion overruling decisions issued the same day, ultimately holding that the Kansas state SORN law was not sufficiently punitive so as to be subject to Ex Post Facto prohibitions.
United States v. Holena (3rd Cir. 2018)
Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in context of revocation of Supervised Release, reversed imposition of lifetime internet use ban.
Weida v. State (Ind. 2018)
Indiana Supreme Court holding that requirement that person on supervision for sex offense obtain approval from probation officer to access internet was unreasonable.
People v. Pepitone (Ill. 2018)
Illinois Supreme Court holding that presence bans for people convicted of sex offenses was not unconstitutional.
Noe v. SORB (Mass. 2018)
Massachusetts SJC case holding that, at reclassification hearings, burden of proof is with the government to establish that current classification is correct.
In re Registrant G.A. (N.J. Super. 2018)
New Jersey Superior Court holding that legislative amendments to state SORN were not intended to have retroactive effect.
In re Bethea (N.C. 2017)
North Carolina Court of Appeals holding that refusal of trial court to terminate duty to register did not offend Ex Post Facto principles nor Due Process rights.
Healey v. Carter et al. (Ind. Ct. App. 2018)
Indiana Court of Appeals holding that actions of state Dep’t of Corrections did not violate right of jury trial in regards to registration.
Doe v. Jindal (E.D. La. 2012)
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana holding that requiring registration for violation of state Crimes Against Nature by Solicitation statute violated Equal Protection.
Doe v. Cuomo (2nd Cir. 2014)
Second Circuit opinion holding that amendments to New York state’s SORN law did not offend various constitutional prohibitions nor constitute breach of plea agreement.
Doe v. SORB (Mass. 2018)
Massachusetts SJC holding that burden of proof to establish continued appropriateness of duty to register must remain with the government to comport with Due Process in classification proceedings.
Doe v. Anderson (Me. 2015)
Maine Supreme Judicial Court holding that state amendments to SORNA law may have violated constitutional prohibitions against Bills of Attainder.
Doe v. City of Albuquerque (10th Cir. 2012)
Tenth Circuit affirming district court finding that City of Albuquerque’s ban of people on the registry from entering city libraries was unconstitutional under First and Fourteenth Amendments.
Does v. Boone Co. Prosecutor (Ind. Ct. App. 2017)
Court of Appeals of Indiana holding that statute banning certain people required to register from school property did not include churches.
Dep’t Public Safety v. Does (Alaska 2018)
Alaska Supreme Court finding that, under state law, whether someone who committed an out of state offense was required to register in Alaska turned on analysis of the elements of the offense.
Delgado v. Swearingen (N.D. Fla. 2018)
District Court for the Northern District of Florida held, in context of civil rights lawsuit under First and Fourteenth Amendments, that Florida statutes requiring those on sex offense registry provide internet identifiers to authorities was constitutional, though enjoined FDLE from public disclosure.
Bridges v. State (Ind. Ct. App. 2018)
Indiana Court of Appeals affirming trial court denial of motion to dismiss failure to register indictment alleging that provisions of Indiana state law that required tolling of registration requirements during periods of incarceration violated Ex Post Facto provisions.