Sex offender law tested anew

Challenges to Nevada's new sex offender law mounted Tuesday as the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada filed a complaint in federal court on behalf of 12 sex offenders who claim the law is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit was filed on the same day a District Court judge granted an injunction on behalf of two unnamed sex offenders, which permits them temporarily not to comply with the new law, known as the Adam Walsh Act.

The ACLU, along with attorney Robert Langford, is challenging the state attorney general, the Department of Public Safety and several law enforcement agencies responsible for implementing the law.

The lawsuit claims the new law, set to take effect on July 1, violates sex offenders' constitutional rights by punishing them for crimes for which they've already served time. It also restricts their movement in that the law prevents them from being within certain distances of schools, parks or day care facilities, the lawsuit states.

"We think the changes are extreme, overbroad and vague, and don't rationally further public safety," said Maggie McLetchie, staff attorney with the ACLU of Nevada.

The federal lawsuit asks for a temporary stay in the law but the ACLU eventually wants the changes to be permanently struck down.

The new law, Assembly Bill 579, was passed during the 2007 legislative session. It is designed to bring Nevada into compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act, signed into law in 2006 by President Bush.

The Nevada law changes how the state categorizes sex offenders. Currently, they are categorized by their risk of re-offending; under the new law they'll be categorized by the crime committed.

As a result, the number of Tier 3 sex offenders, the most serious offenders, will jump to more than 2,500 in Nevada, up from 165, authorities say.

The new Tier 3 offenders will be required to report to law enforcement every 90 days and submit to fingerprinting. Their personal information, including photos, will be placed on the state's sex offender Web sites for public viewing.

Under the current system, low-level Tier 1 offenders register with the state annually and their information and photos aren't available to the public.

Supporters of the law say sex offenders will have a harder time evading detection nationwide when the federal law is enacted by all states. They say the public has a right to know whether sex offenders are living in their community.

Critics contend that the law doesn't protect the public because it only provides information on what the offender did instead of whether they are a risk to re-offend.

Daniel Burns, spokesman for the Nevada Department of Public Safety, said the department will comply with the law that the legislature passed but will also comply with any orders issued from state or federal judges.

Cindy Pyzel, assistant chief of the Nevada attorney general's bureau of public affairs, declined to comment on the ACLU's challenge but said the office is defending AB 579 as constitutional.

Of the 12 sex offenders represented in the ACLU's and Langford's lawsuit, one was convicted of attempted sexual assault in Colorado in 1986. Another pleaded guilty to attempted lewdness with a child under the age of 14 in 2002.

One sex offender, who pleaded guilty to three counts of attempted lewdness with a child under the age of 14 in 2005, lives within 1,000 feet of a grammar school and believes he will have to move in accordance with the law. He's being reclassified from a Tier 1 offender to a Tier 3, as are several of the other sex offenders mentioned in the lawsuit.

"People are subjected to these laws without any notice or challenge to their classification," McLetchie said. "The law has a huge impact on them."

On Tuesday, District Judge David Wall granted the preliminary injunction for two sex offenders who filed a challenge to the new law. The injunction, filed by attorney Richard Schonfeld, allows the sex offenders, known only as D.P. and W.L., to not comply with the new law while their case is heard in court. It was granted in part because the sex offenders might win their case, Schonfeld said.

D.P. was convicted of gross sexual imposition in 1993 in Ohio. He was categorized as a Tier 1 after he moved to Las Vegas but will become a Tier 3 under the new law.

W.L. was convicted of lewdness with a minor in 1994. He too is a Tier 1 but will become a Tier 3.

"I'm pleased with the ruling," Schonfeld said. "It preserves my clients' status until the court has a chance to read the briefs."

Contact reporter David Kihara at dkihara@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-1039.