California’s Sex Offender Residency Law Found Unconstitutional

San Jose Sex Offender Violation Defense Lawyer And Santa Clara Sex Crime Attorney

Being listed on California’ sex offender registry creates many problems for those who have been convicted of sex crimes. Some of the biggest problems are those caused by housing restrictions. In March, the California Supreme Court addressed concerns over the state’s sex offender residency law in California, unanimously finding that the blanket prohibitions were indeed unconstitutional.

The Facts

The case, In re William Taylor, was brought by a group of registered sex offenders residing in San Diego who objected to the residency requirements contained in the state’s sex offender law, known as Jessica’s Law. The lead plaintiff, William Taylor, was convicted of rape in Arizona in 1991. He originally planned to live with family in Spring Valley when he was released from prison in 2008, but was unable to do so as the location of the residence was not compliant with California’s residency requirements. For the next few years, Taylor lived on the streets; in a drug rehabilitation clinic, where he received a special waiver to reside, as the building violated the law’s residency requirements; and at a boarding house located three hours from his parole office and out-patient medical clinic.

The Court’s Analysis

In reviewing the law’s constitutionality, the Court pointed to the amendments to the penal code which made it “unlawful for any person for whom registration is required…to reside within 2,000 feet of any public or private school, or park where children regularly gather.” In particular, the Court noted that of the 482 registered sex offenders on parole in San Diego County, 34 percent reported being homeless. It also noted that sex offenders on parole are essentially barred from access to around 97 percent of rental properties. As a result, more sex offenders have become homeless in the years since 2006, making a large portion of that population un-traceable. The Court also acknowledged troubling evidence that parole officers were instructed not to advise parolees where they could live without violating the law.

The Holding

Ultimately, the Court held that, even under the deferential standard of rational basis review, a blanket prohibition like that existing in the text of Jessica’s Law is plainly unconstitutional. However, the Court confirmed that individual judges will retain the power to impose discretionary residency standards which are based on the specific circumstances of each parolee.

Being convicted of a sex offense and having to register with the state as a sex offender can have far-reaching consequences in employment, housing, education, and other areas of life, so it is important to retain an experienced attorney to help you organize a defense and protect your rights. If you have been charged with a sex offense, please reach out to skilled San Jose criminal defense attorney Wesley Schroeder today to schedule a consultation.