« Ind. Decisions - Transfer list for week ending May 17, 2013 | Main | Courts - More on "SCOTUS Takes Case on Prayer at Town Board Meetings" »

Monday, May 20, 2013

Ind. Decisions - More on Cline, a sex offender registry case that was scheduled for oral argument this week

Earlier today the "Upcoming Oral Arguments" post included:

[CANCELLED] 9:00 AM - Jeremiah Cline v. State of Indiana (06S05-1302-MI-92) - When Cline petitioned for removal of his name and information from the Indiana Sex Offender Registry, the Boone Circuit Court ruled that although Cline is not required to register, the court is without statutory authority to order removal of his existing information from the registry. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Cline v. State, 971 N.E.2d 1240 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal. [From Docket: JOINT NOTICE OF MOOTNESS AND VERIFIED JOINT MOTION TO REMAND ENTERED ON 05/15/13]
The ILB has now obtained a copy of the Joint Motion, access it here. In pertinent part it reads:
5. On May 9, 2013, the Governor signed HEA 1053, thus enacting amendments to Ind. Code § 11-8-8-22. The statute now relevantly states that a person may petition a court to "(1) remove the person's designation as an offender and order the department to remove all information regarding the person from the public portal of the sex and violent offender registry Internet web site established under IC 36-2-13-5.5; or (2) require the person to register under less restrictive conditions." Ind. Code § 11-8-8-22(c)(l) aud (2) (emphasis in original).

6. Under the recent amendment, Cline may now receive the relief for which he petitioned. The statutory amendment ensures that trial comts have authority to order the removal of infonnation from the sex offender registry for petitioners such as Cline who successfully obtain relief from their duty to register under Ind. Code § 11-8-8-22. The State will not oppose the removal of Cline's information from the sex offenderregistry. Therefore, this case is moot.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 20, 2013 02:02 PM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments