The Court of Appeals, in State of Indiana v. Anthony Pollard, held that Indiana’s sex offender residency restriction; IC 35-42-4-11 was unconstitutional as it applied in Mr. Pollard’s particular case.
I have cases involving the same statute with facts that are not precisely analogous to those of Mr. Pollard, so I won’t comment too extensively here. However, it appears that the Court of Appeals generally took a rather dim view of the statute which prohibits registered sex offenders from residing within 1,000 feet of school property, a public park, or a youth program center. The particular holding of the case, however, seems to have hinged on the fact that Mr. Pollard owned the property in which he resided prior to implementation of the statute. This will almost certainly be taken up with the Supreme Court, if it will take the case, and is not conclusive for other fact situations — such as where the sex offender does not have an ownership interest in the property and/or acquired an ownership interest in the property after the statute went into effect.
Leave a Reply