OK - Probation questions

The following was sent to us via the "Tell Us Your Story" form and posted with the users permission.

By Michelle:
I have recently learned that I have fallen love with a sex offender. We live in Oklahoma. He never served time he was given 10 yrs suspended sentence and is currently on probation. He has 2 1/2 yrs left before he has completed his probation. I am looking for some one to help me understand what happens when his probation is up. Will some of his restrictions be lifted? What is still expected of him? I've tried looking for site to help me understand what I may be facing in the future but am not having any luck. I do have a child under the age of 18. Do we have any kind of a chance for a future together? Can anyone help me or give me some website that I can visit? Thank you for your time.

OK - Sex registry law needs overhaul

David Slane

Original Article

06/04/2014

By David Slane (Law Firm)

In 2007, the Oklahoma State Legislature approved a new law that required all sex offenders be classified under a three-tier system that placed offenders in a specific category depending on the nature of the sex crime.

However, the Oklahoma Department of Corrections (DOC) went a step further and made the new registration law retroactive to 1998. However, in June 2013, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled the retroactive application of the rule was unconstitutional.

The court’s landmark ruling allowed more than 2,000 sex offenders to remove their names from the statewide registry because their registration requirements had either expired or would be prolonged by the 2007 law.

The law has left everyone scratching their heads about what’s next. The current registration system makes no sense and leaves plenty of room for debate about fairness and public safety.

It makes sense for the state Legislature to return to the drawing board and start over on this law.

Some people are on the registry because they urinated in a public street, and they’re not sex offenders. State officials need to stop wasting time and precious resources on those registrants. For the record, indecent exposure convictions and other low-level offenses require 15 years of registration.

Instead, devote the majority of resources to the high-risk offenders who need the most intensive supervision and strictest registration requirements the state can offer. The high-risk offenders should be required to check in daily, which would give the public a higher level of security.

Level 2 offenders, those who pose a moderate danger to the community, must register for 25 years. Meanwhile, Level 3 offenders, those who pose a serious danger to the community and are likely to engage in criminal sexual conduct, must register for their lifetime.

Part of the problem is that DOC officials, when implementing the system, tossed most of Oklahoma’s sex offenders into the Level 3 category. They didn’t want to take the heat to make an honest assessment of each case.

Changing the system will take a groundswell of public support. Still, reform of any kind might cause consternation for most state lawmakers who have never seen a sex offender law they didn’t like. It’s popular to be tough on crime, which includes drunks who urinate next to their car.

It’s time for Oklahoma legislators to stop thinking about re-election and polls and study what works and doesn’t work with the sex offender registration system.

One solution is to remove the registration assessment out of the hands of DOC only and rework the procedure to include trial judges, district attorneys and defense attorneys. That would provide a higher level of fairness while ensuring public safety. A broken system gives parents and the community a false sense of security while really protecting no one.

When most people think of a sex offender, they think of a baby raper or serial rapist. But the truth is most sex offenders are convicted of nothing even similar. We need to stop painting every sex offender with the same broad brush and look at individuals for what they did and act accordingly.

While high-risk sex offenders need to be closely supervised, it’s critical for others who have completed their sentence to be given a second chance at life.

OK - Thousands come off sex offender list months after new law

Original Article

05/13/2014

By La'Tasha Givens

A new law took thousands off the sex offender registry.

Exposing yourself near a playground, urinating in public or peeping in a bathroom stall are just some of the actions that have landed thousands of people on the sex offender registry.

Now many of those names are disappearing from the list.

“If you were to slap a woman on the behind, that would be sexual battery and you would have to register for 15 years and that has nothing to do with children on the playground,” said attorney David Slane. “People who urinated in public or fall under what we call the Romeo and Juliet situation, where the young man may have been just a little bit older than the girl or vice versa. They’re the ones typically being removed.”

Slane said he’s taken on over 400 sex offender cases, more than anyone else in the state.

In many situations the offenders were on the list way past their punishment because the laws kept changing.

“They’ve had a number of changes or revisions of sex offender registration act over the last ten or 15 years and the court said those later laws could not apply retroactively,” said Jerry Massey spokesperson for the Department of Corrections (DOC).

Out of the 2,400 now off the list, Slane said most are level one or level two offenders which does not include those who committed violent and heinous sex crimes.

He also said under the new law a judge is able to decide a punishment on a case by case basis and not paint all offenders with a wide brush.

Slane said, “The more serious cases are the one we should spend our resources on, not someone who urinated in public.”

DOC officials say they still have another 2,700 cases to review to see if there are more offenders who are eligible to come off the list based on the new law.

OK - Third Circuit Upholds SORNA Against Nondelegation Challenge

Original Article

04/15/2014

On April 10, the Third Circuit upheld the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) against an interesting nondelegation challenge - in U.S. v. Cooper. SORNA applies retroactively to sex offenders convicted before the enactment of the statute (the possible ex post facto issue was not part of this new case), and delegates to the Attorney General full discretion to create registration procedures for pre-enactment offenders). The court explains:

The statute defines “sex offender” to include individuals who were convicted of sex offenses prior to the enactment of SORNA. 42 U.S.C. § 16911(1) (defining “sex offender” as “an individual who was convicted of a sex offense”); see also Reynolds, 132 S.Ct. at 978 (noting that SORNA “defines the term ‘sex offender’ as including these pre-Act offenders”). However, SORNA does not set forth the registration procedures for pre-SORNA sex offenders. Instead, in 42 U.S.C. § 16913(d), Congress delegated to the United States Attorney General the authority to determine whether SORNA's registration requirements would apply retroactively to pre-SORNA sex offenders.

Only two Circuits (Ninth and Tenth) have not yet addressed this issue, and the Third Circuit notes that there seems to be a consensus forming on the point, rather than a split, though the Supreme Court has repeatedly denied cert in this cases:

Each of our sister circuits to have considered the issue has concluded that SORNA does not violate the nondelegation doctrine. See, e.g., United States v. Goodwin, 717 F.3d 511, 516–17 (7th Cir.2013), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 334, 187 L.Ed.2d 234 (2013); United States v. Kuehl, 706 F.3d 917, 919–20 (8th Cir.2013); United States v. Parks, 698 F.3d 1, 7–8 (1st Cir.2012), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 2021, 185 L.Ed.2d 889 (2013); United States v. Rogers, 468 F. App'x 359, 362 (4th Cir.2012) (not precedential), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 157, 184 L.Ed.2d 78 (2012); United States v. Felts, 674 F.3d 599, 606 (6th Cir.2012); United States v. Guzman, 591 F.3d 83, 92–93 (2d Cir.2010), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 3487 (2010); United States v. Whaley, 577 F.3d 254, 263–64 (5th Cir.2009); United States v. Ambert, 561 F.3d 1202, 1213–14 (11th Cir.2009).

OK - House of Representatives votes to ban habitual or aggravated sex offenders in parks

Josh Cockroft

Original Article

As long as there are politicians they will exploit people and situations for their own gain while trampling on the civil / human rights of others.

Most sexual crimes occur by the victims own family, not some stranger in a park, but hey, that doesn't get brownie points from the people now does it?

04/14/2014

OKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma House of Representatives has voted to prohibit habitual or aggravated sex offenders from entering a neighborhood, town, county or state park.

The House voted 93-1 Monday for the bill that bans individuals who have committed a crime against a child or individuals who have committed more than one sex crime from entering the parks. Republican Rep. Josh Cockroft of Wanette said the bill stems from uncertainty over whether or not state parks are included in a current ban.

Cockroft said he believes sex offender laws need to be continually updated to make sure there are no loopholes allowing sex offenders access to public places frequented by children.
- That would be pretty much everywhere!

The bill now returns to the Senate for consideration of House amendments.

See Also:

• (04/15/2014) Sex Offenders Say Park Ban Goes Too Far (Video below)

OK - Bill prohibits sex offender name changes

Original Article

02/26/2014

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Registered sex offenders in Oklahoma would be prohibited from legally changing their names under a bill that has cleared the state Senate.

The Senate voted 44-0 on Wednesday for the bill by Oklahoma City Republican state Sen. Kyle Loveless. The measure now heads to the House for consideration.

Loveless says he's learned of cases where sex offenders have changed their names so they could pass a background check and go to work for public schools.

He said his bill would take away "ways they've played the system."

OK - Convicted sex offender sues to stay in his home

Original Article

02/18/2014

By Cydney Baron

PRYOR - A convicted sex offender has sued the district attorney and city of Pryor over housing dispute.

_____ bought a home near Jefferson Elementary School in Pryor before the sex offender law was passed which would prevent him from living within 2,000 feet of the school.

He was convicted of a child sexual offense in 2008. When he was released from prison in 2013, law enforcement told him he could not live in his house because of it’s proximity to a school.

_____’s position is he owned the home before the sex offender law took effect and he believes he should be able to live in the home.

_____, represented by attorney Gerald Lee, filed a petition for a declaratory judgment Feb. 7 listing the defendants as District Attorney Janice Steidley, the City of Pryor Creek and Pryor Police Department.

The petition states that _____, the plaintiff, “acquired his home on Nov. 8, 2000,” and lived there until Jan. 14, 2009.

According to Lee's request, on Aug. 8, 2008, the plaintiff pleaded guilty to possessing “material involving the sexual exploitation of minors/possessing a visual depiction.”

_____ was released from prison Aug. 10, 2013, according to the judgment.

“After Plaintiff's release from custody of the City of Pryor, by and through the Pryor Police Department, told the Plaintiff in August 2013 that his home is within 2,000 feet of Jefferson Elementary School and that he could not reside in his home pursuant to Title 57 O.S. Section 590A.”

The title in question states it is “unlawful for any person registered pursuant to the Sex Offenders Registration Act to reside within 2,000 feet of any public or private school,” and that “it is a penal statute by reason of the statute states any person who violates the residency restriction is subject to imprisonment and fine,” all according to the request. The title became effective in November 2003.

_____ then wrote the district attorney's office, requesting the district attorney agree that _____ could reside in his home.

“The District Attorney's Office has not offered any written response to the Defendant's Attorney's letter. The only response from the District Attorney's Office was a verbal response from the Assistant District Attorney stating that the plaintiff could not reside in his home in reliance on opinion of the Oklahoma Attorney General,” Lee's petition states.

Further , it states that no state shall pass an ex post facto law. That means a law written “after the fact” will not apply.

“The Plaintiff is unable to obtain or purchase another residence due to the fact that Plaintiff is 71 years old, has health problems, he is permanently, physically disabled, and his only income is his state retirement and social security benefits,” the petition states.

Online court records describe this case as a civil case in which relief sought exceeds $10,000, though no monetary amounts were listed in the official request.

In a declaratory judgment, a judge will decide how the law relates to this case. Lee believes the declaratory judgment will be _____ should be allowed to stay in his home.

OK - Oklahoma Senate bill makes it harder for sex offenders to hide past

Original Article

02/11/2014

By Jay Dillon and Phil Cross

OKLAHOMA CITY - Sex offenders are using a loophole to help get around the state's registry requirements and some Oklahoma lawmakers say it is putting the public at risk. Now there's a plan to close the loopholes and make the state's sex offender registry more reliable for the people of Oklahoma.

One proposal from Senator Kyle Loveless (R-Oklahoma City) would make it illegal for registered sex offenders to change their name. "There was a gentleman in Lawton who had changed his name like 20 years ago and then again recently and he had worked for the Lawton public schools as a school bus driver," Loveless told Fox 25, "If he had kept his original name he wouldn't have been employed because they would have caught him in the first place."

Loveless says some districts rely on searching by names or dates of birth when they do their own background checks and having multiple names makes it more difficult to find a person's past. "Here's a gentleman who purposefully tried to go around the system and this way that would prevent them from doing so."

On the other side of the fifth floor, Senator David Holt, (R-Bethany) has his own proposal to strengthen the sex offender registry. His idea came from one of his voters who kept a close eye on the sex offender registry and discovered pictures of offenders were outdated.

"The current law only requires taking a photo the very first time," Holt said, "After that is says may take another photo and may turns into never."

Holt's proposal would require offenders to have a new picture taken every time they check in with local law enforcement. He told Fox 25, it is now much easier to take and upload photos than it was two decades ago when the law was passed. "Common sense makes sense, I think it would have been done in the beginning if they had been thinking ahead."

"The legislature keeps fixing problems that don't exist," said defense attorney David Slane, "They keep piling on law after law after law and the fear is that once you get so many laws in place you're just going to run these people underground and they're not going to register and you're not going to be able to find them."

Slane represents many sex offenders and has successfully won cases pulling a large number of offenders off the registry. He says both proposals are concerning and could violate the rights of people who have served their prison time. "People have been targeted as the victims of violence and murder because they were on the registry and there may be a good reason why a person would need to change their name."

Both senators say their proposals are not final and could be amended to address the concerns of law enforcement, but neither believes their bills would have a negative impact on sex offenders. Instead they say they are most concerned with improving public safety. Both bills passed a Senate committee and are headed to the Senate floor.

See Also:

• New Bill Requires Updated Photos For Sex Offenders

OK - New Bill Requires Updated Photos For Sex Offenders

Original Article

02/09/2014

By Heather Hope

OKLAHOMA CITY - An Oklahoma mother is now pushing to make a change with the state's Sex Offender Registry. She says the pictures on the website are so old you can't recognize the people who could be a danger in your neighborhood. Now lawmakers are getting involved.

The bill is basically the same as the current Sex Offenders Registration Act. The only change is instead saying law enforcement "may" take a photo each time, it says they "shall".

"It started when I was 9 and half almost 10 and lasted until I was 12," said bill supporter, Chantal Morris.

Morris says she'll always remember how her ex-stepfather and his nephew sexually abused her and her brothers. Now a PTA mom of two, she says she still checks the Sex Offender Registry to make sure her two abusers aren't living anywhere near her. And she noticed their pictures are 10 years old.

"I'm not going to forget their face ever, but for someone who's looking on their website looking at their photo, they may not see the red flags or anything," Morris said.

Morris brought up the issue to Sen. David Holt, who wrote Senate Bill 1444, requiring that sex offenders take a current photo every single time they have to register.

"Some of these people are on that list for life, so you could have a 50-year-old photo, and the law is very clear that they only may take a photo," said Holt.

Attorney David Slane, who represents many sex offenders, thinks the law would be a waste of resources.

"And when you take and have about 5,000 people now that you're going to take they're pictures every three to six months to a year, you don't think that's going to take time. I bet you if you ask law enforcement, they'll tell you that it is going to take time," said Slane.

"If the pictures are updated yearly, then every year, you have a potential to save a child from abuse," Morris said.

The bill would require sex offenders take a new photo either every three to six or 12 months, based on their offense level. The bill passed out of the "public safety" committee last week, and is moving on to be heard on the Senate floor.