{"id":226,"date":"2017-07-26T10:11:55","date_gmt":"2017-07-26T15:11:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?page_id=226"},"modified":"2019-10-21T15:10:19","modified_gmt":"2019-10-21T20:10:19","slug":"wallace-v-state-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2017\/07\/26\/wallace-v-state-2009\/","title":{"rendered":"Wallace v. State (Ind. 2009)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"introduction-wrapper\">\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\">Wallace v. State, 905 N.E.2d 371 (Ind. 2009)<\/h2>\n<p><strong><strong>Nature of Case:\u00a0<\/strong><\/strong>Appellant was convicted prior to adoption of sexual offense registry in Indiana. Subsequent to adoption, he was informed that he was required to register and he refused to do so. Subsequently, he was charged with failure to register. Trial court denied motion to dismiss on, inter alia, ex post facto grounds and he was convicted. Appealed and Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed. Indiana Supreme Court granted review.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Holding:\u00a0<\/strong> Indiana Supreme Court found that, as applied, Indiana&#8217;s sex offense registry constituted punishment and therefore violated state constitutional prohibition on retrospective punishments.<\/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\/2017\/07\/Indiana-Supreme-Court-Opinion.pdf\">Indiana Supreme Court Opinion<\/a>\u00a0| view via <a href=\"https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=14663108658196676342&amp;q=905+N.E.2d+371&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=4000006\">Google Scholar<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Appellants-Brief.pdf\">Appellant&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/07\/Appellees-Brief.pdf\">Appellee&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>News and Related Materials<\/em><\/h2>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Indiana Supreme Court holding that, as applied and on state constitutional grounds, person convicted of sexual offense prior to enactment of registry could not be made to register without offending constitutional prohibitions on retrospective punishment. <\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2017\/07\/26\/wallace-v-state-2009\/\" class=\"more-link\">Wallace v. State (Ind. 2009)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":242,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","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":[84,36,124],"class_list":{"0":"post-226","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-sorn-cases","7":"tag-7th-cir","8":"tag-ex-post-facto","9":"tag-indiana","10":"entry"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226","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\/242"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=226"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}