Megan's Law Statutes
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Today, every state in the nation as well as the federal government has enacted a "Megan's Law" statutes. Essentially, these laws require that convicted sexual offenders register with local authorities when they move into a neighborhood. The laws also require that local residents be notified when such offenders move into their communities. In some cases, these laws allow the publishing of sexual offenders addresses on the Internet as a means of public notification. A third variation of such statutes also requires that sexual offenders who have completed their sentence but who remain a perceived threat to society may be involuntarily committed in psychiatric institutions until such time as they are determined to no longer pose a threat to society.Not surprisingly, critics of these laws argue that they violate the constitutional rights of convicted sex offenders. In particular, critics point to the constitutional protections against double jeopardy, invasion of privacy, cruel and unusual punishment, and ex-post facto laws. Such critics, however, are in the difficult position of arguing for the constitutional rights of individuals who have often committed heinous crimes involving children against the pictures of their young, innocent victims. It is not surprising, therefore, that these laws have largely withstood constitutional scrutiny. This paper explores the constitutional issues surrounding Megan's Laws and concludes with some seemingly si
. . .
ld that such statutes did not violate constitutional proscriptions against ex-post facto laws because such laws were civil regulatory schemes and not punitive in nature.
The United States Supreme Court has also rejected other constitutional arguments against such laws. For example, in Kansas v. Hendricks, the Supreme Court faced the issue of whether the State of Kansas' post-sentence involuntary commitment statute for sex offenders violated their constitutional rights against cruel and unusual punishment and double jeopardy. Essentially, Hendricks argued, similar to the argument in Westerheide, that an involuntary commitment after he had completed his sentence effectively sentenced him to a second and indefinite term of punishment for a crime for which he had already served his sentence. Here, the Supreme Court again held that Kansas' statute was a civil action rather than a criminal procedure and, therefore, did not trigger any criminal procedural protections.
Nonetheless, registration opponents argue that sex offenders should not have to endure additional post-sentence requirements because they have paid their debt to society and such laws only punish them for their status as sex offenders rather than for any particular
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Supreme Court, Megan's Law, Megan's Laws, Nathaniel Pallone, Court Appeals, Commissioner Corrections, Frank Penna, Kanka Timmendequas, Attorney Jersey, Wetterling Act, sex offenders, megan's law, sex offender, supreme court, constitutional rights, megan's laws, ex-post facto, offender registration, sexual offenders, convicted sex, supreme court held, ex-post facto laws, cruel unusual punishment, 1998 megan's law, united supreme court,
Approximate Word count = 2725
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Megan Law Statutes
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
