NJ high court bars retroactive application of Megan’s Law
In 2014, the Legislature passed legislation that enhanced the degree of failing to fully comply with community notification requirements from the fourth degree to the third degree. The four defendants in this case were paroled before the 2014 amendment, according to the court, but were indicted for violations that could have subjected them to prison terms and parole supervision for life under the 2014 amendment. Trial judges dismissed the charges, saying the enhanced penalties violated ex post facto clauses of the state and federal constitutions, and the Appellate Division affirmed. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the state’s appeal.
In Wednesday’s decision, Albin said the 2014 change to Megan’s Law “violates defendants’ rights under the New Jersey Constitution’s ex post facto clause” and amounted to a sentencing enhancement as applied to those defendants. “In effect, the 2014 amendment materially altered defendants’ prior sentences to their disadvantage,” he said. “The 2014 amendment effected not a simple procedural change but rather one that offends the very principles animating the ex post facto clauses of our federal and state constitutions.”
“The State contends that the 2014 Amendment is a classic recidivist statute that enhances the punishment for subsequent offenses and therefore is not an ex post facto law. However, the 2014 Amendment operates differently than recidivist statutes that have withstood challenge under the Federal and State Ex Post Facto Clauses,” Albin wrote, adding that “the 2014 Amendment related not to the commission of a subsequent crime but rather to the terms of the sentence imposed for defendants’ prior crimes.” The court held that the case at bar is “not substantively different from” that of its 2015 decision in State v. Perez, where the court said that a law retroactively enhancing the defendant’s status to “parole supervision for life” from “community supervision for life” violated ex post facto provisions as applied. A spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office, which handled the state’s appeal, declined to comment.
- SBA takes one step toward fair chance lending, but needs to take another - September 7, 2023
- CCRC seeking a Deputy Director - June 13, 2023
- Biden Administration announces actions to promote reintegration - April 28, 2023
- SBA modifies criminal history restrictions in its loan programs - April 14, 2023
- DC enacts progressive new record-clearing law - April 6, 2023
- Pending federal reforms promise support for justice-affected entrepreneurs - March 9, 2023
- SBA proposes to ease criminal history restrictions in loan programs - January 19, 2023
- Oklahoma and California win Reintegration Champion awards for 2022 laws - January 17, 2023
- The Frontiers of Dignity: Clean Slate and Other Criminal Record Reforms in 2022 - January 10, 2023
- Marijuana legalization and record clearing in 2022 - December 20, 2022