Sex Offender Registry

The Iowa Court of Appeals has fended off another attack on the sex offender registry in State v. Iowa District Court for Story County, No. 2-998/12-0024, filed 9 January 2013. In this case the District Court modified a sex offender registry requirement and the State of Iowa filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the appellate courts to find the district court's act illegal--which it did. Having been involved in sex offender registry cases, with a case on appeal at the moment, this issue is of interest. The appeal courts of this state to date have rebuffed all challenges to the sex offender registry using various arguments and upholding the legislation passed by our esteemed legislature. It is clear to me being familiar with many judges and various district courts in the fifth judicial district that there is a conflict between the district courts and the appeal courts on the issue of the sex offender registry. The district courts and the attorneys practicing criminal law in them are well aware that the sex offender registry is dysfunctional, mean, and ineffective. As an example, we have had one case in Jasper County where a man was arrested because he lived within 2,000 feet of a school. The sheriff went to his door and arrested him, taking him to jail, and charging him with a violation of the requirement that he not live within 2,000 feet of a school or other place designated in the Iowa Code. The man is confined to a wheelchair. In other instances we have men attempting to live in tents at various spots in the county, because, in Newton, if the 2,000 foot rule applies to you, you cannot live within the city limits. Those of us who are actually interacting with the people restricted from living within 2,000 of a kiddy facility know full well that this law causes an unwarranted hardship on those subject to it, causes an extremely high degree of bitterness from those to which it applies, and is ineffective. In Polk County the registration requirement has created ghettos of sex offenders most of whom are harmless and burdens them with one more impediment to living a normal life which presumably is the goal of all penal legislation (normal meaning crime free). The courts should begin chipping away at these sexual offender registry statutes. This may be difficult considering the level of fear that has permeated the public over sex offenders, but it would be the right thing to do.

It is Monday and court service day in district court. The public defender's office was in town to take over the felony docket from the contract attorneys. We received the view of the effort to take over the entire state from the contract attorneys. It is an ambitious effort. An effort that will not work with the staff they have. I expect with the ending of the recession they will make a push to create statewide offices to continue their efforts to take over the criminal defense of the entire state.

I had two defendants go to prison today and one to the violator's program which is in effect prison since it is located in prison and lasts four to six months. Judge Goodhue presided. It was an especially busy day since they have taken one of the two court service days from us and put the civil docket on Monday afternoons rather than Tuesday. Wednesday I have a custody trial scheduled and we will "probably" travel to Knoxville to try the case. Can't say what will happen to the witness that I need which I subpoenaed to Jasper County since we did not know where we were going when I sent the subpoena to the sheriff. This is a real mess and will get worse before it shakes out.

The consensus of opinion seems to be that the judicial department is causing as much trouble for the general public as possible so the public will contact their legislators and insist they do something about it. Can't say what the legislator will do about anything this year but cut budgets. We shall see.