Residency restrictions based on offense not convicted of?
My ex husband recently bought a house, moved in 2 weeks ago and registered at the address. Got notified yesterday that he was in violation of the city ordinance residency restriction. City ordinance states that the restriction is limited to individuals who have committed an aggravated offense against a minor as defined by the state. Ex was convicted of statutory rape 12 years ago with no subsequent or prior offenses and has completed all aspects of his sentence other than registering. His actual charge does not meet the criteria for an aggravated offense, but the police department are saying that a statement made by the victim at some point, but not included in any of the court records I have seen (that she had initially said no before agreeing), indicate that he committed an aggravated offense. However, if that had been proven in a court of law, he would have been convicted under a different statute in addition to or instead of statutory rape. Can these types of ordinances be applied based on crimes you were not convicted of? Does anyone have any experience with this?
This can’t possibly be legal. I’d say they are betting he won’t fight it. I’m very black and white about this. He either was convicted or he wasn’t. If his conviction doesn’t meet aggravated criteria they don’t have a leg to stand on, legally, but still want to bully anyone in the registry into compliance. I’d fight it.
Recent Comments