Sexual Predator Residency cases

The U.S. Southern District Court of Ohio yesterday ruled that convicted sex offenders who had sued to block enforcement of Ohio’s sexual predator requirement barring residence 1,000 feet from a school, lacked legal standing to pursue their case.

An Enquirer article this morning quotes David Singleton, a lawyer with the Ohio Justice & Policy Center as saying that the position taken by the Court was “completely wrong,” and that he hopes it will reconsider in order to avoid appealing it.

The OJPC has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the matter of Doe v. Miller, an 8th. Circuit case upholding Iowa’s sex offender residency statute which has a 2000-foot requirement. The Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) argues in that brief that “research has shown that criminal offenders with stable housing, employment, and social support are less likely to commit new offenses compared with those who lack stability,” and assert that “residency requirements like those passed in Iowa, Ohio, and other states, deprive sex offenders of those things (which) may increase the risk of recidivism.”

OJPC’s press release of the brief makes the statement that “the Iowa case, if taken by the Supreme Court, could have enormous implications for sex offender residency statutes nationwide. If the Supreme Court declares Iowa’s statute unconstitutional, it’s likely that similar statutes across the country would also be found unconstitutional.”