Search for: "Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board" Results 1 - 20 of 40
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Aug 2021, 8:26 am
[A]ppellant's sentence was  inappropriate due to a confinement facility policy which violated the First  Amendment by preventing appellant from having any form of contact with his non­ victim biological children without first completing a sex offender treatment program and admitting his guilt. [read post]
30 Jun 2021, 10:28 am by Jonathan Pyzer B.A., L.L.B.
If the offender does not use a weapon and the complainant is over 16 years old, there is no mandatory minimum sentence. [read post]
1 Dec 2020, 12:02 pm by Patricia Hughes
G involved Christopher’s Law (Sex Offender Registry), 2000, which established the Ontario sex registry, and the different treatment of persons found guilty of a sexual offence and those held to be not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCRMD”). [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:33 am by Emma Quinn-Judge
 Feliz had “no prior record of a sex offense”; “no psychiatric diagnosis indicating a compulsion toward sexually deviant activity; no history of violations of probation or terms of pretrial release;” no exclusion zones entered into the GPS monitoring system; “no geographically proximate victim”; and had been classified by the Sex Offender Registry Board as a level one sex offender, meaning… [read post]
24 Sep 2018, 1:08 pm by Deborah Heller
Gundy had been convicted of state sex offenses in Maryland that required his registration on the sex offender registry on October 3, 2005. [read post]
30 Jul 2017, 7:47 am by Eric Goldman
Based on these allegations, the Court could reasonably conclude that Defendant created a portion of his websites’ content by adding the personal information of those Plaintiffs not listed on preexisting sex offender registries and misidentifying them as individuals who have been convicted of a sex-related offense. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 1:22 pm by Andrew Hamm
App’x 189 (10th Cir. 2009) (joined opinion) sex offender registry does not violate Commerce Clause United States v. [read post]
3 Nov 2016, 2:32 pm by John Elwood
(relisted after the October 14 conference)   Gloucester County School Board v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 11:28 am by John Elwood
(apparently relisted after the October 14 conference)   Gloucester County School Board v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 7:43 am by John Elwood
California Franchise Tax Board, 15-1442 (addressing the Multistate Tax Compact); Haugen v. [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 1:18 pm by John Elwood
In an effort to make North Carolina “one of the toughest states, if not the toughest state” in the country in dealing with those on its sex-offender registry, North Carolina enacted N.C. [read post]
30 Mar 2016, 9:02 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
”School boards can make accommodations for students whose gender identity does not correspond with their legal sex, but the accommodation cannot be simply allowing them to use the other bathroom. [read post]