September 23, 2014
by Alison Sacriponte
A divided New Jersey Supreme Court on Monday ruled that requiring a sex offender to wear a GPS tracking device after he has completed his sentence violates the federal and state constitutions. The 2007 Sex Offender Monitoring Act (SOMA) requires the states highest-risk sex offenders to wear GPS ...[read more]
October 24, 2013
by Stephanie Kogut
JURIST Guest Columnist Adam R. Banner discusses three recent Oklahoma Supreme Court decisions relating to sex-offender registration laws and the effects of the decisions beyond the state's borders...Recent decisions have relied on the reasoning of the US Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe when ...[read more]
June 10, 2013
by Jaclyn Belczyk
The US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Monday in Peugh v. United States that there is an ex post facto violation when a defendant is sentenced under US Sentencing Guidelines promulgated after he committed his criminal acts and the new version provides a higher applicable Guidelines sentencing range than ...[read more]
March 27, 2012
by Garrett Eisenhour
On March 27, 2009, the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that a South Carolina law requiring first-degree sex offenders to submit to a DNA test and pay $250 in processing fees prior to their release does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause of the US Constitution. The case of ...[read more]
June 27, 2011
by Maureen Cosgrove
The US Supreme Court, ruled Monday in a per curiam opinion in US v. Juvenile Male that the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had no authority to rule that the requirements of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006 (SORNA) violate the ex post facto clause of the ...[read more]
May 24, 2010
by Dwyer Arce
The US Supreme Court on Monday ruled 7-1 in United States v. Marcus that the lower court had misapplied precedent interpreting plain error in an alleged ex post facto violation. The court held that the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had erred in its interpretation of two criteria in ...[read more]
March 27, 2009
by Bhargav Katikaneni
The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled Thursday that a South Carolina law requiring convicted first degree sex offenders to submit to a DNA test and pay $250 in processing fees prior to their release does not violate the ex post facto clause of the Constitution. Anthony Eubanks, ...[read more]
July 17, 2008
by Deirdre Jurand
A military judge hasdenied a motion to dismiss by Guantanamo Bay detainee Salim Ahmed Hamdan, holding that the military commission assigned to his trial has the appropriate jurisdiction to hear the case. Hamdan's lawyers moved for dismissal of thecharges in January, arguing that bec... ...[read more]
May 14, 2008
by Mike Rosen-Molina
The Indiana Court of Appeals Tuesday ruled that a 2006 state law barring convicted sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school, public park or youth center is unconstitutional as applied to offenders who purchased their homes before the law went into effect. The ruling upholds a lower ...[read more]
June 7, 2005
by jt
Doe v. Moore, et al., United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, June 6, 2005. Excerpt:In this putative class action, initiated by ten John Does and one Jane Doe (collectively Appellants) on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, we determine whether Florida... ...[read more]

Support JURIST

We rely on our readers to keep JURIST running

 Donate now!

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.