MATTHEW J. FREELAND, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jimmy Ryce Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The registration and reporting requirements of Section 943.0485, Florida Statutes (2000) are regulatory and procedural in nature and do not violate the ex post facto clause. See Simmons v. State, 753 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding that section 943.0435, Florida Statutes, does not violate ex post facto clause as it neither alters the definition of criminal conduct nor constitutes punishment). See also Westerheide v. State, 831 So. 2d 93, 102-04 (Fla.2002) (holding that the Jimmy Ryce Act is not punitive in nature and does not violate ex post facto clause); Gonzalez v. State, 808 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that the reporting requirements as well as the notification requirements of Florida’s Sexual Predator Act are regulatory and procedural in nature and do not violate the ex post facto clause); Rickman v. State, 714 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (holding that registration requirement of Florida’s Sexual Predator Act is procedural and regulatory in nature and does not constitute punishment in violation of ex post facto clause).
AFFIRMED.
BARFIELD, MINER and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Therrien v. State, 859 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…ork where children regularly congregate, even if he could show that he could do so without threatening the public safety. This circumstance distinguishes the present case from Milks v. State, 848 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) and Freeland v. State, 832 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). [*592] Ordinarily, not even non-penal7 statutes can divest citizens of substantive rights retroactively. See generally Chase Sec. Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 312 n. 8, and 315-16, 65 S.Ct. 1137, 89 L.Ed. 1628 (1945); Willi…
-
Givens v. State, 851 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…, its retroactive application does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. In addition, the First and Fourth Districts have held that section 943.0435 is procedural in nature and does not violate the Ex [*815] Post Facto Clause. See Freeland v. State, 832 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Simmons v. State, 753 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). We agree and hold that the application of section 943.0435 to Givens does not violate ex post facto principles. Accordingly, we affirm Givens’ judgment and sentence for failu…
-
Boyer v. State, 946 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…term is used-in rule 3.800(a). See Gonzalez v. State, 808 So. 2d 1265 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (quoting Fletcher v. State, 699 So. 2d 346, 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)); Walker v. State, 718 So. 2d 217, 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); see also Freeland v. State, 832 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (holding that the registration and reporting requirements of the Sexual Predator Act are “regulatory and procedural in nature and do not violate the ex post facto clause.”). Consequently, Appellant cannot challenge [*76] his desi…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Westerheide v. State, 831 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 2002)
- Simmons v. State, 753 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Houston v. State, 714 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Gonzalez v. State, 808 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)