New Jersey Appeals Court Limits Sex Offender Monitoring
A recent decision by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, held that requiring intensive supervision of sex offenders under a retroactive application of state law violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the Constitution.
November 05, 2011 /24-7PressRelease/ -- A recent decision by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, held that requiring intensive supervision of sex offenders under a retroactive application of state law violates Constitutional principles. The case, Riley v. New Jersey State Parole Board, involved a New Jersey man who appealed a parole board decision regarding his 1986 conviction for attempted sexual assault.
At issue was whether satellite-based monitoring under New Jersey's Sex Offender Monitoring Act could be applied to a parolee who was convicted more than 20 years before the law's passage but was released two years after it went into effect. The law, which was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor in 2007, required the Chairman of the New Jersey Parole Board to work with the Attorney General to establish a program for continuous electronic monitoring of certain New Jersey sex crimes offenders.
The parolee had been designated as a Tier III offender under Megan's Law, based on a determination that he posed a high risk of reoffending. Megan's Law is based on the principle that the potential for recidivism by sex offenders and "offenders who commit other predatory acts against children" justifies a system of registration that empowers public safety officials to alert the public about the presence of individuals who have completed their criminal sentences.
He was informed by the Parole Board that he was subject to eleven conditions of release from prison, including typical requirements regarding residence, employment and travel. But he was also required to subject to installation of a global positioning satellite (GPS) monitoring system and ensure that the system was properly maintained and operative. The parolee objected to the conditions, arguing that he had fulfilled the terms of his sentence and should not be subjected to parole supervision, and his administrative appeal was rejected by the Chairman of the Parole Board.
The Ex Post Facto Clause: Protecting Individual Dignity, Freedom and Liberty
The parolee appealed further, arguing that retroactive application of GPS monitoring under New Jersey law violated the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the United States and New Jersey Constitutions. Both documents forbid the passage of both "bills of attainder" (a legislative declaration of a person's guilt) and ex post facto laws (laws that retroactively change the consequences of acts that were committed prior to passage).
The Appellate Division agreed that the law's retroactive effect must be assessed, noting the U.S. Supreme Court's characterization of the Ex Post Facto Clause as a "towering constitutional provision of great importance to individual dignity, freedom, and liberty." The court then reviewed the law under the following legal standard: intentionally punitive statutes are clear violations of the Constitution, but even if the intent of lawmakers is "civil and unpunitive," the law can be shown to have a punitive purpose or effect.
The appellate court concluded that the law was essentially regulatory and not intentionally punitive, but found that its punitive effect violated the Ex Post Facto Clause. Based on its analysis of seven factors provided by the U.S. Supreme Court as indicators of punitive effects, the court concluded that the Sex Offender Monitoring Act imposes "affirmative disabilities and restraints" that are similar to sanctions that have historically been regarded as punishment. The judges noted that GPS sex-offender monitoring is substantially more severe than the registration and notification provisions of Alaska's version of Megan's Law, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in articulating the legal standard for ex post facto analysis of post-incarceration sex crimes sanctions.
Sex Crimes Defense Lawyers Advise Clients About Their Rights
The Appellate Division's holding that intensive sex offender monitoring cannot be retroactively applied to individuals who were convicted before its passage is a clear victory for civil libertarians and criminal justice advocates. Just what this and other recent New Jersey sex crimes legal developments mean in a specific case is best resolved in consultation with a criminal defense attorney
Whether aspects of this decision will apply to other severe restrictions imposed by Megan's law and other statutes with retroactive effect can only be answered in further appeals. Nonetheless, individuals suspected, accused or convicted of criminal sexual contact, luring, solicitation, statutory rape and other crimes can all benefit from the experience of a New Jersey sex crimes lawyer who knows how to employ new legal developments to a client's advantage.
Press Release Contact Information:
FL Web Advantage
