State Supreme Court won’t rule on teen sex offender law

Mon, Sep 8, 2008 (6:41 p.m.)

CARSON CITY -- The Nevada Supreme Court has declined to rule on the constitutionality of a new law stating that teenage sex offenders can be punished as adults.

The court dismissed the appeal of Clark County in 21 cases that these youth, who were 14 years old and older and had committed sexual acts, had to register as sex offenders.

District Judge William Voy of the Clark County Family Court ruled that a part of a new law involving sexual offenses by teenagers was invalid. He said setting the age at 14 was arbitrary. There should be a basis for setting that age, he said.

In his decision, Voy said some youngsters who are younger than 14 are just as disposed to committing another sex crime and the law takes away the discretion of the courts.

In dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court said the decision of Judge Voy is not a final judgment in the cases of these 21 juveniles. “We lack jurisdiction to consider these appeals,” said the three-justice panel of the Supreme Court.

The 2007 Legislature patterned the law after the federal Adam Walsh Act that included many teenage sex offenders age 14 and older with adults in requirements for sex offender registration and community notification.

The federal act said the states must enact similar laws or lose federal funds.

Discussion: 5 comments so far…

By lry

9/8/08 at 8:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

ats cuz day doan no watt to say
By Justadadathome

9/9/08 at 5:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

I thank the writer for the article.
Great to see the news.
The link to the actual Court Case and previous ruling is here:
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/74th/Bills/AB...

I must say, I wished the writer of the article would do a more descriptive explanation of the decision.

I found the below thought on another website:

In a previous decision....Here it is in slow-mo: Under the new laws, 14-year-old sex offenders can be punished as adults. But a child who is 13 years, 11 months and 29 days can’t. This age distinction, Voy noted, is arbitrary. Without a rational reason for the age cap, the law is a violation of due process, because part of due process is the right to rational law.

Were it not for Voy’s determination, the laws would go into effect July 1. Maggie McCletchie, ACLU of Nevada staff attorney, expects the laws will not be enforced until the Supreme Court hears the appeals. The state’s high court is not expected to rule on the case before July 1.

http://www.cfcamerica.org
By Justadadathome

9/9/08 at 6:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

"The 2007 Legislature patterned the law after the federal Adam Walsh Act that included many teenage sex offenders age 14 and older with adults in requirements for sex offender registration and community notification.

The federal act said the states must enact similar laws or lose federal funds."

Notice how the Federal Government is blackmaling the states? Pass these laws, or you will lose money.

Is that Extortion, or Blackmail... what would the legal term be for that.

This practice only promotes legislatures, hungry for money for their state, and eager to make a name for themselves to pass ignorant legislation which harms thousands of children and families, effectively making thousands of VICTIMS.

These legislators always talk about the Victim of sex crimes.. holding up some horrific crime which happened recently to shock the voters.. then they get laws passed that make thousands of victims.
Example.. Come watch an innocent 14 year old tell his story of how the united states is effectively ruining his life with legislation such as the Retroactive Adam Walsh Act which is totally unconstitutional. His video is here.

http://www.failamerica.blogspot.com
Families Against Ignorant Legislation, America

Warning, the video may elicit many emotions from the viewer.
By NevadaFive

9/9/08 at 5:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hmmm... A double edged sword here. I will say that Adam Walsh is a manic crusader for the rights of the abused child. Who can blame him after what he went through? He has taken it to extreme limits and it does not take a psychologist to recognize his life-long guilt over the loss of his child to a probable sex maniac, child killer. Politicians, talk-show hosts, police officials have rallied to his cause - no matter who might be innocent or in the way.

Common sense should play a role here - not Adam Walsh. If some 14 year old boy is sexually active (intercourse) with an age appropriate, consenting partner - then such is not a sex crime and the boy should not be listed as such (or vice-versa).
By azsk8fan

9/10/08 at 11:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hows about 'do an adult crime, do adult time'....and I would certainly think violating anyone sexually would fall into the 'adult crime' category.