Appeals court: Minnesota sex offender program constitutional
Criminal Law
Minnesota's program for keeping sex offenders confined after they complete their prison sentences is constitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday, reversing a lower-court judge who said it violates offenders' rights because hardly anyone is ever released.
A three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state, which argued that the program is both constitutional and necessary to protect citizens from dangerous sexual predators who would otherwise go free. The appeals court sent the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.
Only six offenders are currently free on provisional releases from the Minnesota Sex Offender Program, even though it's more than 20 years old. That led U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank in 2015 to declare the program unconstitutional and order changes to make it easier for people to get on a pathway for release.
The Minnesota case has been closely watched by lawyers, government officials and activists in the 20 states with similar programs. While civilly committed offenders in California, Wisconsin, New Jersey and other states are allowed to re-enter society after completing treatment, Minnesota has the highest per capita lockup rate, and its courts didn't order the unconditional release of anyone from its program until August.
Minnesota's offenders are confined by court order for treatment at secure facilities in Moose Lake and St. Peter that are ringed by razor wire, though there's a section outside the wire at St. Peter for people who've progressed to the later stages of treatment and been given some limited freedoms. They're officially considered patients or residents, not prisoners. But the lawsuit filed on behalf of more than 700 offenders argued that the program amounts to a life sentence.
Related listings
-
Kenya president: International Criminal Court not impartial
Criminal Law 12/21/2016Kenya's president on Monday criticized the International Criminal Court as "not impartial," saying his government "will give serious thought" to its membership of the court. In a speech during celebrations marking 53 years since Kenya became independ...
-
Court: Asylum not automatic for former gang members
Criminal Law 12/02/2016Immigrants in the United States illegally are not automatically eligible for asylum on the basis that they are former gang members who risk persecution if they return home, a federal appeals court panel ruled Wednesday. Three judges from the 9th U.S....
-
UK court brings Brexit plans screeching to halt
Criminal Law 11/04/2016Britain's High Court brought government plans for leaving the European Union screeching to a halt Thursday, ruling that the prime minister can't trigger the U.K.'s exit from the bloc without parliamentary approval. The government said it would go to ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.