{"id":1638,"date":"2019-01-20T14:10:51","date_gmt":"2019-01-20T20:10:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?p=1638"},"modified":"2019-10-21T15:49:49","modified_gmt":"2019-10-21T20:49:49","slug":"in-re-z-b-s-d-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2019\/01\/20\/in-re-z-b-s-d-2008\/","title":{"rendered":"In re Z.B. (S.D. 2008)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"introduction-wrapper\">\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\">In re Z.B., 757 N.W.2d 595 (SD 2008)<\/h2>\n<p><strong><strong>Nature of Case: <\/strong><\/strong> Appellant was convicted of two first-degree rapes as a juvenile, and was required to register. South Dakota law required that Appellant remain on the sex offender registry for life, whereas if he would have committed the same offense as an adult he would have the opportunity to have his name removed. Appellant challenged this discrepancy on equal protection grounds, and the trial court rejected Appellant&#8217;s arguments. Appellant sought review.<\/p>\n<p><strong> Holding: <\/strong>The South Dakota Supreme Court held that South Dakota&#8217;s sex offense registration scheme violated Equal Protection when it considered Z.B. and other juveniles in Z.B.&#8217;s position. Judgment reversed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>Case Documents<\/em><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2019\/08\/South-Dakota-Supreme-Court-Opinion.pdf\">South Dakota Supreme Court Opinion<\/a>\u00a0| view via <a href=\"https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=7692232900346376014&amp;q=757+N.W.2d+595&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=4000006\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Google Scholar<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2019\/08\/Appellees-Brief.pdf\">Appellee&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2019\/08\/Appellants-Reply-Brief.pdf\">Appellant&#8217;s Reply Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>News and Related Materials<\/em><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li>Southwestern Law Review &#8211; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.swlaw.edu\/sites\/default\/files\/2017-04\/2%20Throwaway%20Children.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Throwaway Children: The Tragic Consequences of a False Narrative<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>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.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2019\/01\/20\/in-re-z-b-s-d-2008\/\" class=\"more-link\">In re Z.B. (S.D. 2008)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":836,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[67,51,46,219],"class_list":{"0":"post-1638","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-sorn-cases","7":"tag-8th-cir","8":"tag-equal-protection","9":"tag-juvenile-registration","10":"tag-south-dakota","11":"entry"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/836"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1638"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}