{"id":1934,"date":"2019-12-27T11:25:53","date_gmt":"2019-12-27T17:25:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?p=1934"},"modified":"2019-12-27T11:25:53","modified_gmt":"2019-12-27T17:25:53","slug":"state-v-jackson-wis-ct-app-2019","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2019\/12\/27\/state-v-jackson-wis-ct-app-2019\/","title":{"rendered":"State v. Jackson (Wis. Ct. App. 2019)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

State v. Jackson, No. 2018AP2074- CR (Wis. Ct. App. 2019)<\/h2>\n

Nature of Case: <\/strong><\/strong> Defendant was charged with violating a state statute that required him to disclose information related to his internet usage and screen names within 10 days to the state Department of Corrections. He entered a plea of No Contest to the charges, and sought appellate review on the question of whether the statute violated the First Amendment, both facially and as-applied.<\/p>\n

Holding: <\/strong> Wisconsin Court of Appeals held that the statute was constitutional. Due to the Defendant’s plea of No Contest, the Court declined to review his arguments with respect to whether the statute was unconstitutional as-applied. The Court found that, facially, the statute was not an unconstitutional abridgement of the Defendant’s right to free speech, and that because the statute included at least some protections against public disclosure of that information, it did not infringe on the right to anonymous speech.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Case Documents<\/em><\/h2>\n