Ohio's high court upholds retroactive application of Sierah's Law
Oct. 22—COLUMBUS — A divided Ohio Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of a new law requiring those convicted of the most violent crimes to register with the state for 10 years upon release from prison even if they were convicted before the law took effect.
Sierah's Law created Ohio's first statewide database of violent offenders. Passed three years ago, it is named for Sierah Joughin, a 20-year-old Metamora, Ohio woman who was kidnapped and murdered in 2016 by James D. Worley, of Delta, Ohio, who had previously served time for a Lucas County abduction.
Ms. Joughin's family persuaded state lawmakers that the immediate search for the missing woman would have been helped if police had access to such a list of people living nearby. That database is maintained by the state based on information gathered by county sheriffs, and offenders are required to update their information annually or whenever they change addresses.
Failure to comply is a fifth-degree felony carrying up to a year in prison.
The court's 4-3 majority Thursday said the violent-offender registry is less burdensome and invasive than prior retroactive applications, such as Megan's Law for sex offenders, that the court has upheld.
"A requirement to appear and disclose information neither prevents a violent offender from doing something — such as living near schools or working with children — nor physically restrains the offender," Justice Sharon Kennedy wrote for the majority. "Rather, Sierah's Law simply imposes a duty to appear annually at the sheriff's office, enroll in the registry, and keep the required information up to date."
Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor and Justices Pat Fischer and Pat DeWine concurred in the final determination.
Justices Melody Stewart, Michael Donnelly, and Jennifer Brunner dissented.
Justice Stewart wrote that Sierah's Law is punitive and the legislation never contended that it wasn't; therefore, it cannot be applied retroactively.
She also disagreed with the majority's determination that the information is unavailable to the public, because individuals can obtain it on a case-by-case basis by visiting a sheriff's office. She pointed to the fact that the length of time a past offender must register can be extended dramatically, potentially to a lifetime, for noncompliance.
"When coupled with the fact that people who have been convicted of registration-eligible offenses often have difficulty finding work, it becomes not just possible but probable that a person who has served his time and then lived a law-abiding life will nevertheless be obligated to report indefinitely, simply because he has not been able to pay large fines that might be decades old," Justice Stewart wrote.
"Thus, the fact that the General Assembly has seen fit to use the extended-reporting mechanism to enforce underlying criminal sanctions all but conclusively demonstrates a punitive rather than a remedial intent," she wrote. "That is especially so given that an unpaid fine by itself may be enough to bring about indefinite reporting, with no discretion given to the trial court "
The case stemmed from a Butler County case in which a man was convicted of murder prior to the law taking effect but was sentenced under its provisions shortly after it became law. The high-court ruling resolves conflicting decisions issued by different appellate courts.
First Published October 22, 2021, 10:18am
