Episode 475 (Duration 26:13) Here are 4 cases on the Illinois Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) You should know something about.
In re B.C., 2018 IL App (3d) 170025 (February). Episode 465 (Duration 13:21) The law does allow a petitioner to establish that it is “more probable than not” that he poses no risk to the community not withstanding an evaluation that says he poses a “low risk to the community.”
People v. Tetter, 2018 IL App (3d) 150243 (January). Episode 463 (Duration 8:43) SORA declared unconstiututional as applied to this defendant.
In re T.J.D., 2017 IL App (5th) 170133 (November). Episode 449 (Duration 11:39) Petitioner has to prove he poses “no risk” to reoffend even though evaluators never go beyond a “low risk” assessment.
People v. Jackson, 2017 IL App (3d) 150154 (September). Episode 411 (Duration 11:31) Again, State charges under the wrong SORA provision.
People v. McClenton, 2017 IL App (3d) 160387 (September). Episode 408 (Duration 6:55) Judge can’t dismiss SORA charges or order ISP to remove a person from the sex offender registry.
In re B.G., 2017 IL App (3d) 170144 (July). Episode 407 (Duration 5:24) Defendant’s right to petition to end his sex offender registration was not terminated by his new offense.
People v. Jones, 2017 IL App (1st) 143718 (July). Episode 406 (Duration 8:56) This SORA conviction is reversed because the state failed to prove defendant had a duty to register.
Packingham v. North Carolina, 15-1194 (June 2017). Episode 386 (Duration 10:04) Can’t have a sweeping law keeping sex offenders off of Facebook and other social media.
People v. Gomez, 2017 IL App (1st) 142950 (March). Episode 322 (Duration 5:56) Another failure to register as a sex offender is overruled; really highlighting it matters how they charge these things.