How Many Days Can A Registered Sex Offender Stay In Different States

Topic:
DAY CARE; LEGISLATION; State BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS; MUNICIPALITIES; RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS; Sexual activity CRIMES; MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES; SCHOOLS (General);
Location:
Sexual activity OFFENDERS;

OLR Research Report


May 23, 2007		2007-R-0380
Sex OFFENDERS ' RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS

By: Sandra Norman-Eady, Chief Attorney

Yous asked for information about land laws and local ordinances that forbid registered sex offenders from residing in or visiting certain areas.

SUMMARY

As of August 2006, at least 21 states and over 400 local governments had adopted sexual activity offender residency restriction laws and ordinances, respectively, according to the California Research Bureau in an August 2006 report entitled The Impact of Residency Restrictions on Sexual activity Offenders and Correctional Management Practices: A Literature Review. These laws are modeled subsequently nuisance codes, creating sexual activity offender-gratis zones like drug-free zones. They typically prohibit sexual practice offenders from living, and sometimes working or loitering, within a specified distance of designated places where children besiege.

Similar all states, Connecticut requires sex offenders to register. And like almost states, police must notify residents when a sex offender moves or returns to their neighborhoods. But, the state has not enacted a law restricting sex offenders ' residency. This could modify soon, yet. A bill, sHB 5503, currently before the General Associates requires the Hazard Assessment Board to use the risk assessment scale it develops to determine the sex offenders who should be prohibited from living within i,000 anxiety of the property comprising an elementary or secondary schoolhouse or a licensed eye- or dwelling-based child day care facility.

Danbury is the only city in this state known to have an ordinance restricting sex offenders ' residency. The ordinance prohibits sex offenders from entering a public park, playground, recreation center, bathing beach, swimming puddle, sports field, or sports facility.

Proponents of residency restrictions argue the need to safeguard potential victims and opponents argue the need to track offenders. We take institute no empirical studies on whether these laws reduce crime rates.

Ramble challenges to the laws and ordinances have been unsuccessful.

Groundwork

States began trying to continue rail of sex offenders over 50 years ago, when, in 1947, California enacted the offset sexual practice offender registration constabulary. Now all states accept sex activity offender registration laws that assistance law enforcement agencies keep track of offenders ' movements.

In the mid 1990 ' s states, following the federal government ' s pb, enacted community notification laws that crave law enforcement agencies to inform residents of the identity and location of sex offenders in their neighborhoods. These notification laws acquired people to complain to their local official when sexual activity offenders moved into their neighborhoods. Equally a result, five years after the first notification constabulary the outset sexual activity offender residency and kid safety zone restriction law was enacted in Texas.

Sexual practice OFFENDER RESIDENCY RESTRICTION LAWS AND ORDINANCES

Country Laws

At to the lowest degree 21 states accept laws restricting where registered sexual practice offenders can visit or live. The nigh common type of restriction prohibits them from residing inside a certain distance of specified places where children besiege. Distance markers generally range from one,000 to two,000 feet from the designated identify; however, Illinois and South Dakota take 500 foot altitude markers. Some states limit the restrictions to offenders (ane) convicted of merely the nigh serious offenses (Arkansas, California, Indiana, and Louisiana) or (ii) about probable to reoffend based on some type of take a chance assessment (Minnesota and Washington). Table 1 shows the 22 states, lists their relevant statutes, and describes the ban.

TABLE 1: RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS By STATE


States With Sex Offender Residency Brake Laws
*Land*	*Statutory Citations*	*Restriction*
Alabama	� 15-20-26(a)	A sex activity offender may not live or piece of work within 2,000 feet of schools or childcare facilities.
Arkansas	� 5-14-128 (a)	A level 3 or 4 (most serious) sex offender cannot live within two,000 feet of schools or daycare centers.
California	W&I Code � 6608.5 (f) (2005) Penal Code � 3003 (g) (1) (3)	A sexually fierce predator or a serious paroled sex activity offender cannot alive within one-fourth of a mile of a school, and high-risk paroled sex activity offenders cannot live within one-half mile of a schoolhouse, daycare middle, or place where children besiege.
Florida	� 947. 1405 (7)(a)(2)	A sex offender whose victim was under 18 years old cannot live within 1,000 anxiety of schools or places where children congregate.
Georgia	�� 42-1-13 and 42-one-15	No sex offender may alive, work, or loiter within 1,000 feet of any school, childcare facility, school bus stop, or place where minors congregate.
Illinois	� 5/11-9.3 (b-v)	A kid sex offender may not alive inside 500 feet of a schoolhouse or school property.
Indiana	� 11-xiii-3-4 (yard) (2) (A)	A trigger-happy sexual practice offender cannot live within 1,000 anxiety of any school property while on parole.
Iowa	� 692 (A)(2A)	A sexual offender may not live inside 2,000 feet of a school or childcare facility.
Kentucky	� 17.495	A sex offender may not live within ane,000 feet of a school, childcare facility, ball field, or playground.
Louisiana	�� 14:91.one and 15.538	A sexually tearing predator and serious paroled sex offender may not live within i,000 feet of schools or related school activities, including schoolhouse passenger vehicle stops for life or duration of parole or probation.
Michigan	�� 28.721 to 28.732	A sexual activity offender cannot live within one,000 anxiety of school condom zone.
Minnesota	MSA Chap. 244.052 et al.	The parole commissioner determines if a level 3 sex offender may alive within i,500 feet of school zones.
Missouri	� 589.417	A sexual practice offender may not live within one,000 anxiety of a school or childcare facility.
Ohio	� 2950.031(A)	A sex offender cannot live inside 1,000 feet of whatever school, childcare facility, or place where children gather.
Oklahoma	OSA Tit. 57 � 590	A registered sex offender cannot live within 2,000 feet of a schoolhouse.

Table 1: –Continued-


States With Sex Offender Residency Restriction Laws
*Country*	*Statutory Citations*	*Restriction*
Oregon	�� 144.642 (i)(a) and 144.644(ii)(a)	The Department of Correction decides where and how close a sexual practice offender can live to a schoolhouse or daycare center based on a decision matrix.
S Dakota	� 22-24B	A sex offender cannot live or loiter inside 500 feet of community prophylactic zones.
Tennessee	� 40-39-[ii]11(a)-(b)	A sex offender cannot live within i,000 feet of schools, childcare facilities, or the victim.
Texas	Texas Govt. Code Chap. 508.187 (b)	The country parole lath decides how shut to a kid safety zone a paroled sex activity offender can live or visit.
Washington	�� nine.94A.712(half-dozen)(a)(2) and 9.95.425-430	A sexual activity offender convicted of a serious criminal offense with a high-hazard cess (Level Two or III) cannot live within a community protection zone (inside 880 anxiety of any school or daycare center)
West Virginia	� 62-12-26 (b) (1)	A paroled sexual practice offender cannot live inside 1,000 anxiety of a school or childcare facility.

Source: California Enquiry Bureau/ California Land Library, 2006.

Local Ordinances

Co-ordinate to the California Enquiry Agency, over 400 municipalities take enacted restrictive ordinances, primarily within the past 2 years. States with known local ordinances include California, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. The number of municipalities with such ordinances varies past land just according to the agency, at least 113 municipalities in New Jersey and 60 in Florida accept them. Like country laws, local ordinances on this issue either forestall offenders from sure areas where children are known to congregate or establish altitude markers.

Danbury is the only city in Connecticut with such an ordinance. It prohibits child sexual practice offenders who are required to register in this state from beingness present in whatsoever child safety zone. A "child safety zone" is a public park, playground, recreation center, bathing embankment, pond or wading pool, or sports field or facility and surrounding land.

The prohibition does not utilize to any person:

one. whose name has been removed from the Department of Public Rubber ' southward Sex Offender Registry or from the registry in some other state or in the federal or military system by court order or expiration of the registration term or

ii. entering into a polling place in a kid safety zone to vote if he leaves immediately after voting.

If a police officeholder reasonably believes a child sex offender is in a kid safety zone in violation of the ordinance, the office must ask him to provide his proper noun, accost, and phone number. If the officer ' s belief is confirmed, he or she must effect the offender a written warning and require him to go out the area. An offender who refuses to leave and subsequent offenders are subject field to a $100 fine for each violation. The fine does non apply if the offender ' s conduct results in his confidence for a new criminal offense or if his parole or probation is revoked because of it (Danbury City Ord. � 12-27).

ARGUMENTS FOR AND Confronting RESTRICTIONS

The near powerful and often the single statement in support of safety zones or residency restrictions is that they reduce recidivism rates by keeping potential victims safe and apart from offenders. Opponents argue that these restrictions have a number of unintended consequences. For example, they (1) isolate offenders, oft forcing them to live in rural areas that lack jobs, transportation, housing, and treatment; (2) create homelessness, making it hard for law enforcement officers to runway offenders; (3) cause offenders to go underground and not update registration data; and (four) can prevent offenders from residing with supportive family members who live in the restricted areas.

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS

Residency restrictions have withstood constitutional challenges in trial and appellate courts in Illinois, Iowa, Ohio, and Southward Dakota. At upshot in these cases collectively was whether the restrictions (1) impose criminal sanctions that penalize offenders whose convictions are final in violation of the ex postal service facto clause of Article I, Department 10, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution, (2) violate the constitutionally-protected right to travel, or (iii) discriminate against offenders in violation of the xiv^th Subpoena ' s Equal Protection Clause.

These courts have held that (1) residency restrictions are a class of civil regulation intended to protect children and thus prohibitions on ex mail facto laws do not utilize; (2) the federal constitution does not include a right to live where one chooses; and (3) residency restrictions are rationally related to states ' legitimate interests in protecting children from harm (see Doe v. Miller, 405 F. 3d 700 (8^th Cir. 2005); Country five. Steering, 701 Northward.W. 2nd 655 (Iowa 2005); Coston five. Petro, 398 F. Supp. 2d 878 (S.D. Ohio 2005); and People 5. Leroy, 357 Ill. App. 3d 530 (2005)).

SN-Eastward:ts