Minnesota District Court grants habeas petition to individual civilly committed to Minnesota's sex offense civil commitment program under the "actual-innocence exception" based on newly discovered evidence regarding recidivism rates and predicted "risk."
As a matter of first impression, the 11th Circuit held that Florida's registration and reporting requirements for individuals convicted of sex offenses did not substantially limit a registrant's actions or movement, and thus, registrant was not “in custody,” within meaning of habeas statute.
Ninth Circuit opinion, on remand from the United States Supreme Court, concluding that Appellant was not “in custody” under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as result of his Alaska state conviction, despite SORNA registration requirements in Tennessee based on his Alaska conviction.
10th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion holding that a habeas corpus petition filed by an individual required to register was time barred, and that he did not raise a sufficiently colorable claim of actual innocence to overcome procedural defects.
Opinion from the Eastern District of New York holding that being subject to New York's SORA does not satisfy the "in custody" requirement for filing a habeas corpus petition.
10th Circuit Court of Appeals denying COA on the argument that registration constitutes custody for habeas corpus purposes.
3rd Circuit Court of Appeals holding that PA SORNA constitutes "custody" for habeas purposes, and is not merely a collateral consequence of a conviction.
South Carolina Supreme Court holding that there is both a statutory and constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in SVP proceedings.
9th Circuit affirmed federal district court dismissal of habeas corpus petition, state court application of Smith v. Doe was not unreasonable in ex post facto challenge.
Seventh Circuit affirming dismissal of habeas corpus petition by civilly committed individual who alleged, inter alia, that diagnoses of paraphilia and personality disorder NOS as well as failure to specifically find lack of volitional control by committing court violated constitutional rights.