CFC OKLAHOMA

SB2067 2/1/2010 Crimes and punishments; stating legislative intent. Effective date.Newberry(S) State Treasurer Scott Meacham, the governor's point man on budget negotiations, as quoted in an article 1/31/10, http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=11908945, said, "You often tend to see a lot of grandstanding and political initiatives that are designed to advance people's political careers and things like that," he said. "Hopefully this will get the Legislature to focus on what's really important to the people -- and that's how they're spending their tax dollars."

In order to SAVE MILLIONS we need to appoint a TASK FORSE to study these laws so law makers are better informed on how to write sex offender laws based on that research!

The time of grandstanding and political initiatives that are designed to advance people's political careers IS OVER!


Why? and what is wrong with the Adam Walsh Act? and SORNA in particular


1. The AWA is NOT research based.
  
    a. Research has shown the AWA to be very expensive.

        We need a serious "open debate" in the Senate in regards to this subject. In the long run it will cost Oklahoma tax payers millions in new taxes for a law that protects no one but endangers everyone. Also, according to Rep Gus Blackwell, "the predators are hiding in the registries." 78% in Tier III which should only reflect Oklahoma's recidivism rate/the most dangerous offenders. Which is less than 10%.

 


Oklahoma Cost of Implementing SORNA ……..$5,867,138
www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf
Oklahoma Byrne Money 2007……………………………….$4,191,238
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/07JAGstateallocations.pdf
Oklahoma 10 percent of Byrne money……………………..$419,124.00
  $419,124.00 divided into $5,867,138 equals 13.998 or 14 years.


If Oklahoma chose NOT to comply, it would take 14 years PLUS before incurred a cost. 

These figures do NOT take into account these ever increasing costs.

* New personnel
* Software, including installation and maintenance
* Additional jail and prison space
* Court and administrative costs
* Law enforcement costs
* Legislative costs related to adopting, and crafting state law

Many states are choosing NOT to comply. California for example,

The California Sex Offender Management Board recommends the
following related to Adam Walsh Act implementation.
The California State Legislature, Governor and citizens should elect
not to come into compliance with the Adam Walsh Act. Current
effective California state law and practice related to offender risk
assessment, juvenile registration and sex offender monitoring is
more consistent with evidence-based practice that can demonstrate
real public safety outcomes

Instead of incurring the substantial - and un-reimbursed - costs
associated with the Adam Walsh Act, California should absorb the
comparatively small loss of federal funds that would result from not
accepting the very costly and ill-advised changes to state law and
policy required by the Act. Any funding cuts to the JAG / Byrne
grants to local law enforcement should be offset with other funds to
ensure that the vital public safety work of those programs is
continued.

Read More:

www.ccoso.org/library%20articles/Adam%20...n%20Paper%201-09.pdf



Randy Lopp, treatment subcommittee chairman of the Oklahoma Sex Offender Management Team says it best, "Most people who know anything about this are frustrated. It is just not helpful -- the laws as they are now,"

''I think if the general public understood the research, they would be willing to back the legislators to change the laws to make more sense and to protect children, because the laws as they are written are not protecting children," he said. "They are doing more harm than good.''

2. Research has shown the AWA to be ineffective at "protecting" and does nothing towards "prevention."

3. The AWA is destroying our most precious commodity. "Our youth." In order to have "substantial compliance with the AWA, Children as young as 14 will end up on the sex offender registry for 25 to lifetime registration without relief.

4.  During the last year, there have been numerous challenges around the country to the retroactive application of sex offender laws.

    a.Missouri:  http://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=36535 Held that, "laws regulating where sex offenders live...cannot apply to those convicted before the laws took effect." A federal district court judge enjoined part of Nebraska’s new sex offender law, holding that Nebraska will not be allowed to enforce the following statutes against persons who have been convicted of sex offenses but who have completed their criminal sentences. http://sentencing.typepad.com/files/kopf-ruling-on-nebraska-sex-offender-law.pdf

    b.

Maine

As detailed here, in State v. Letalien (2009), the defendant challenged the change in registration requirements from 15 years to lifetime and from change in address notifications to proactive 90 day reporting requirements. The Maine Supreme Court held that the change in the registration law violated the US Constitution’s prohibition against ex post facto punishments, noting that the Federal and Maine Constitutions provide the same Ex Post Facto protections.

 

Indiana

In Wallace v. State (2009), the Indiana Supreme Court held that the retroactive application of SORNA to a defendant sentenced prior to the enactment of any registration requirements violated the ex post facto clause of the Indiana Constitution.

Kentucky

In Kentucky v. Baker (Oct. 1, 2009), the Kentucky Supreme Court held that KRS 17.545, which restricts where registered sex offenders may live, could not be applied to those who committed their offenses prior to July 12, 2006, the effective date of the statute. The court noted that the retroactive application of the statute was an ex post facto punishment, which violated Article 1, Section 10 of the United States Constitution and Section 19(1) of the Kentucky Constitution.

NOTE: OKLAHOMA CONSTITUTION: SECTION II-15;  Bills of attainder - Ex post facto laws - Obligation of contracts -
  Forfeitures. " No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the
                     obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed.  No conviction shall
                     work a corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate:  Provided, that
                     this provision shall not prohibit the imposition of pecuniary penalties".

Ninth Circuit

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared in U.S. v. Juvenile Male, No. 07-30290 (9th Cir. Sept. 10, 2009) that part of the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act is unconstitutional as applied to former juvenile offenders:

"We must decide as a matter of first impression — in our court and in any other circuit court — whether the retroactive application of SORNA’s provision covering individuals who were adjudicated juvenile delinquents because of the commission of certain sex offenses before SORNA’s passage violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. In light of the pervasive and severe new and additional disadvantages that result from the mandatory registration of former juvenile offenders and from the requirement that such former offenders report in person to law enforcement authorities every 90 days for 25 years, and in light of the confidentiality that has historically attached to juvenile proceedings, we conclude that the retroactive application of SORNA’s provisions to former juvenile offenders is punitive and, therefore, unconstitutional."

The Kentucky Supreme Court majority concluded that the residency requirements "are so punitive as to negate any intention to deem them civil."

 

Upcoming SCOTUS decision

In Carr v. United States, Docket No. 08-1301, the US Supreme Court will soon consider an ex post facto challenge to SORNA. Oral argument is scheduled for February 24, 2010. The issue to be decided is:      

"Whether a person may be criminally prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 2250 for failure to register when the defendant’s underlying offense and travel in interstate commerce both predated the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s enactment; whether the Ex Post Facto Clause precludes prosecution under § 2250(a) of a person whose underlying offense and travel in interstate commerce both predated SORNA’s enactment."

Here is a nice amicus curiae brief (written by Doug Berman, Wayne Logan, and Corey Yung) that argues that SORNA violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

 

  Ohio, where there are four consolidated cases before the Ohio Supreme Court. Oral Arguments were heard on Nov, 4, 2009 and decisions are expected by Spring 2010. Read about the cases here:
http://constitutionalfights.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/ohio-supreme-court-oral-arguments-begin/
and here:
http://constitutionalfights.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/ohio-supreme-court-oral-argument-videos/

SORNA does NOT deliver what it promised, "protecting our most precious resource. Our Children and our entire society.

There have been MANY studies and articles on the Adam Walsh Act, Registration, Residency Restrictions and Recidivism,

ALL of them and I mean ALL of them say very much the same thing. MORE HARM THAN GOOD!

Some studies can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/ns36qu

I have read all the studies, and there are mountains of research, NONE have said SORNA is effective, NONE say sorna protects children. ALL SAY HARMFUL!

Passing laws that are "feel good," knee jerk is very harmful to our children and society. Politicians who jump on the sex offender band wagon during this election year, should in my opinion be voted out of office because they are creating hysteria for votes and submit bills that when passed, endanger children and all of us.

We need a "Task Force." We do not need  more grandstanding and political initiatives that are designed to advance people's political careers occurs.

I have heard from several lawmakers and they all pretty much say the same thing.

"You are absolutely correct. There are many legislators that do not have the nerve to vote against this type of legislation even when they understand that it not in the best interest of the State. It is my hope that we can stop this before it gets to the full House."


We cannot afford these sex offender laws without first appointing a task force. It is extremely harmful to the state financially and to it's citizens.
Name withheld

< Prev		Next >