State: Fairness of listing predators argued

Fairness of listing predators argued

Florida's high court considers whether sex crime convicts out of prison should get a hearing before their names are publicized.

Associated Press
Published October 8, 2004

TALLAHASSEE - A state law that creates a public list of sexual predators is unconstitutional because names are automatically added without individual hearings, an attorney told the Florida Supreme Court.

But in oral arguments Thursday, a lawyer for the state said the law protects public safety.

"Maybe they're not dangerous this moment but put them in a school yard full of children and they might become dangerous six months from now or a year from now," Christopher Kise told the justices.

State lawmakers decided to adopt a blanket policy of listing the names of certain offenders to protect the public, Kise said. In January 2003, a Miami appeals court ruled the Florida Sexual Predator Act is unconstitutional because it does not require hearings so judges can determine a defendant's actual threat to the community. The law thus violates felons' due process rights by designating them as predators on an Internet registry and in fliers, the 3rd District Court of Appeal said.

But the 2nd DCA in Lakeland has upheld the law. The decision now is with the Supreme Court.

Florida's law is modeled after Megan's Law, which New Jersey lawmakers passed and named for a girl who was raped and killed by a convicted sex offender living in her neighborhood. All states have similar laws.

In Thursday's arguments, Justice Peggy Quince asked if all the laws were intended to protect children, not to just inform the public about the existence of past offenders.

John Morrison, attorney for appellant Ferman Carlos Espindola, said that was the crux of the problem - the list was intended to do more than provide data about records. "That is the gist of this," Morrison said. "Not that these people did something in the past but that they are going to do it again."