The U.S. Marshals partnered with deputies from Wake County and Cumberland County to run compliance checks on registered sex offenders in the Raleigh area. Dubbed "Operation Carolina Shield," law enforcement officers and federal agents spent four days last week checking in on individuals convicted of sex offenses in South and North Carolina to ensure they were completing requirements of their parole.
A federal appeals court in New Mexico ruled that it was unconstitutional under the First Amendment to ban sex offenders from going to the public library. The appeals panel, however, said that less restrictive rules about library participation for sex offenders may not be unconstitutional. The city is considering appealing the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that the sex offender registry laws apply to out-state offenders who move into the state. The ten year period for registering requires that the offender register in North Carolina for ten years. Registration on another state's sex offender registry doesn't count towards the 10 year North Carolina requirement, the Court ruled.
Five years after the Adam Walsh Act was signed by President Bush, new figures show that the majority of states fail to fulfill the requirements of the federal act. The Adam Walsh Act's main component, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) is sex offender registration.
North Carolina, like many other states around the country, is looking for ways to trim and balance the state budget. One possibility that would help to balance the budget is to cut juvenile court resources by millions of dollars.
Several men charged with violating a North Carolina law that prohibits sex offenders from using social networking sites are expected to appeal their conviction under the statute. While the law was signed into effect in 2008, only 18 were charged under the law in 2009 and 75 were charged in 2010.
In our last blog post, we looked at a case decided by the North Carolina Supreme Court that involved an appeal of a satellite-based monitoring program for sex offenders. A dissenting judge provided some valuable insight as to why monitoring sex offenders is counterintuitive. Today, we will discuss exactly how the monitoring is conducted and discuss why the program is inadequate to prevent sex offenses.
In our last blog post, we discussed the use of satellite-based monitoring of sex offenders. The practice, which allows sex offenders to be tracked through GPS ankle bracelets, has come under fire for its flawed approach. Not only is monitoring intrusive, but it also does not prevent further sex offenses from being committed. Today, we will continue to discuss satellite-based monitoring of sex offenders by looking at a recent case decided by the North Carolina Supreme Court.
In 2006, North Carolina's legislature approved satellite-based monitoring of sex offenders. The monitoring was touted as a means of protecting the public after convicted sex offenders were released from prison. The law was called "An Act to Protect North Carolina's Children/Sex Offender Law Changes." At the time, many states were enacting similar sex offender legislation after receiving funds for pilot programs from the federal Adam Walsh Act.