skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 252801 Find in a Library
Title: Sex Offender Registration and Notification in the United States: Current Case Law and Issues, August 2013
Date Published: August 2013
Page Count: 23
Sponsoring Agency: Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART)
Document: PDF
Type: Report (Annual/Periodic) ; Report (Grant Sponsored); Report (Technical Assistance)
Format: Document; Document (Online)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This 2013 report updates the 2012 version of case law and issues on sex offender registration and notification in the United States.
Abstract: In 2013, there were a number of developments in case law, federal legislation, and administrative policies regarding sex offender registration and notification. Two more state supreme courts (Maryland and Oklahoma) held that the retroactive application of sex offender registration and notification requirements violated their state constitution’s ex-post-facto prohibition. These decisions are contrary to existing U.S. Supreme Court precedent on this issue (Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S.l 1009 [2003]), which held that retroactive application of sex offender registration requirements is permissible under the Federal Constitution. In Chaidez v. U.S., 133 S.Ct 1103 (2013), the Supreme Court recently concluded that the holding in Padilla v. Kentucky, does not apply retroactively. “Padilla” held that it was constitutionally deficient representation when counsel failed to inform a client that a guilty plea to a criminal charge carried a risk of deportation. Based on “Padilla,” a number of cases have addressed the issue of whether counsel’s failure to advise a client that a conviction would result in sex offender registration also violates the Sixth Amendment. “Chaldez” undermines this argument. Regarding legislation in 2013, the federal National Defense Authorization Act prohibits the commissioning or enlistment of persons in the Armed Forces who have been convicted of felony sex offenses. Regarding administrative actions, the Department of Defense issued an updated instruction that governs which convictions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice require registration under the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). This report also summarizes two reports issued in 2013 by the Government Accountability Office that reviews the implementation of certain parts of SORNA. 125 notes
Main Term(s): Sex Offender Registration
Index Term(s): Appellate court decisions; Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART); Sex offenders; SMART Resources; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=275029

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.