Search for: "Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board"
Results 21 - 40
of 48
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 May 2021, 12:34 pm
United States v. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 5:42 pm
Five "for publication" opinions today, including one holding constitutional an ordinance banning registered sex offenders from Plainfield's park: In John Doe v. [read post]
24 Jul 2010, 6:32 am
[Slate] Innocent identity theft victim can't get himself from Washington state sex offender registry. [read post]
1 Jun 2020, 5:02 am
From Thursday's Redmond v. [read post]
13 Nov 2011, 2:57 am
In California, the state’s sex-offender management board recommended that the legislature reject the AWA. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:33 am
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]
21 Jul 2007, 8:28 am
§ 9613(g)(3), we affirm. 07a0269p.06 2007/07/18 Doe v. [read post]
30 Jul 2017, 7:47 am
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 Nov 2010, 7:15 am
In today’s case (A.B v. [read post]
29 Nov 2009, 1:34 am
A reader points out that the above is incorrect because the residency laws are NOT RETROACTIVE per decision: Doe-v-Schwarzenegger 2-22-2007 (Hats off to our reader, proof that the media does a bad job on research) Four registered sex offenders, two of whom live in San Diego County, have challenged the residency restrictions, and their case is before the California Supreme Court. [read post]
13 Apr 2007, 8:09 am
Sex Offender Registry Board, 05-MBAR-689 NEW HAMPSHIRE None Found FEDERAL · Harrington v. [read post]
30 Jun 2021, 10:28 am
If the offender does not use a weapon and the complainant is over 16 years old, there is no mandatory minimum sentence. [read post]
26 Oct 2016, 7:16 am
Gloucester County School Board v. [read post]
30 Mar 2016, 9:02 pm
”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]
16 Jan 2007, 12:17 am
Criminal Sanction Impact.01/10/07 referred to correction
LAW / CORRECTNSA1841
Rabbitt -- Makes sex offenders 13 or older, juvenile delinquents, juvenile offenders, youthful offenders, subject to the sex offender registrySUMM : Amd SS168-a, 168-c, 168-e & 168-f, Cor L; amd S720.35, CP L; amd S380.1, Fam Ct Act Makes sex offenders 13 years of age or older, juvenile delinquents, juvenile offenders, youthful… [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 11:28 am
(apparently relisted after the October 14 conference) Gloucester County School Board v. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 1:32 am
DNA samples; offenders Last Act: 03/03/08 reference changed to codesA10118
Cusick -- Provides for family members of a crime victim and interested parties to make statements to members of the parole board Same as S 6825-A BLURB : CP L. fam and int pty state to p Last Act: 03/03/08 referred to codesA10122
Eddington (MS) -- Enables school districts to be reimbursed for the expense of disseminating sex offender information No Same as BLURB : Pen L.… [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:16 am
PARDONS & SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY Davis v. [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 8:29 am
Cooper v. [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 1:18 pm
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]
