While the law requires that communities be notified of the presence of certain dangerous offenders, the court ruled that an impartial review must be conducted to determine the extent of this notification. Under the law, police must forward the registration information to prosecutors and the State police, along with fingerprints or DNA evidence, a summary of the case, and any other information pertaining to the offender's risk of committing another sex crime. The level of risk posed by the individual offender determines the breadth of dissemination of information about his/her criminal background. The court rejected constitutional challenges based on the principles of ex post facto, double jeopardy, bill of attainder, or cruel and unusual punishment. In addition, the court ruled that the law did not violate an offender's right to privacy, equal protection, or due process.