The three-judge panel continued in relevant part: In K.G., this court addressed the distinct challenges raised by four convicted sex offenders on Parole Supervision for Life (PSL) to restrictions on their use of the Internet. Being challenged were “regulations adopted after J.I. to establish new criteria and procedures for the imposition of a special condition […]
Sex Offenders and Social Media (Part 3)
Judge Sumners continued in relevant part: Given our conclusion the CSL social media ban is facially unconstitutional, we are not required to address R.K.’s contention that the ban is unconstitutional as applied to him. Nevertheless, it is important to stress that based upon our rulings in J.I., and K.G., we conclude the social media ban […]
Sex Offenders and Social Media (Part 2)
The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: A statute is unconstitutional if it gives a public official such broad powers “that the exercise of constitutionally protected conduct depends on the official’s own subjective views as to the propriety of the conduct.” Lashinsky (1979) (citation omitted). Likewise, “with laws that carry penal enforcement” such as a […]
Sex Offenders and Social Media (Part 1)
On April 27, 2020, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Somerset County case of State v. R.K. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6.4 involved the constitutionality of banning a sex offender from using social media. Presiding Judge Sumners wrote for the Court in relevant part: Accordingly, we join in this reasoning to conclude Packingham is […]
Crime Spree Expungements (Part 2)
Judge O’Malley concluded with the following: The documents submitted do not indicate that police sought or executed a search warrant on petitioner or that any narcotics were recovered outside of the small amounts purchased by the “friend” and undercover officer. As a result, the manner in which the distribution was accomplished suggests that the events […]
Crime Spree Expungements (Part 1)
On November 12, 2019, Judge Jill O-Malley of the Monmouth County Law Division decided the case od State v. A.R. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 52-1 concerned whether the “crime spree” exception made the defendant eligible for an expungement of convictions for offenses that occurred over six weeks. Judge O’Malley held in relevant part: In […]
Risking Widespread Injury
On March 10, 2020, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Middlesex County case of State v. Kyle P. Brown. The principal issue under N.J.S.A 2C:17-2 was whether setting a car on fire that exploded is a basis for “Causing or Risking Widespread Injury or Damage.” Judge Sumners held in relevant part: In order for defendant […]
Megan’s Law Risk Assessment Scale (Part 4)
The Appellate Division concluded with the following: Without an alternative instrument, or new study or empirical data, J.G. and C.C. rely on the assertion that child pornography was not expressly considered when the RRAS was developed. That argument is an insufficient basis for rejecting the use of the RRAS. The RRAS was developed in 1995 […]
Megan’s Law Risk Assessment Scale (Part 3)
Judge Gilson continued in relevant part: Just as importantly, the trial courts found that there was clear and convincing evidence that J.G. and C.C. posed moderate risks of sexual re-offending. J.G. had possessed at least six images and twenty-three videos of child pornography. Moreover, he possessed some of that child pornography for more than three […]
Megan’s Law Risk Assessment Scale (Part 2)
The Appellate panel continued in relevant part: B. The evidence presented by J.G. and C.C. Under existing case law, a registrant can challenge his or her individual classification, but cannot challenge the RRAS itself. Nevertheless, we do not read In re G.B. or its progeny as forever precluding a challenge to the RRAS provided the […]
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 48
- Next Page »
