Appeals court docket OKs use of ‘sexual predator’ label on driver’s licenses – Solar Sentinel

-

TALLAHASSEE — A full Florida appeals court docket Friday reversed course and upheld the constitutionality of a state requirement that convicted sexual predators have the phrases “SEXUAL PREDATOR” on their driver’s licenses.

The fifth District Court docket of Attraction, in a Sumter County case, rejected arguments that requiring the designation on licenses violated First Modification rights. That got here after a panel of the court docket, in a 2-1 resolution in January, dominated the requirement was unconstitutional.

The license designation was challenged by Michael Crist, who was launched from jail in 2008 after serving a sentence for a conviction on prices of tried sexual battery on a toddler beneath age 12 and lewd and lascivious molestation, in keeping with court docket paperwork. Crist was on probation after being launched and had the sexual-predator designation on his driver’s license.

In 2019, a probation officer requested to see the license and observed Crist making an attempt to scratch off what a court docket doc described as a “pleased face emoji” sticker that coated the phrases SEXUAL PREDATOR. Crist was charged with possession of a driver’s license with out the required designation and tried proof tampering and was in the end despatched again to jail.

Crist argued that the required sexual-predator designation on his driver’s license was compelled authorities speech that violated First Modification rights.

However in a 30-page fundamental opinion Friday, Decide Jordan Pratt rejected the argument.

“Any affordable observer will perceive that it’s the state’s message that Crist is a sexual predator, simply because it’s the state’s message that he’s licensed to drive in Florida and has a sure ‘date of beginning, top, weight, or eye shade.’” Pratt wrote, partially quoting one other authorized ruling. “And by marking Crist’s license — a private identification card usually hidden from public view — relatively than his entrance yard, workplace entrance, enterprise ads, private car, or customized web site, the state has not compelled Crist to publicly show or disseminate its message.”

Chief Decide Harvey Jay and Judges Eric Eisnaugle, Joe Boatwright, Paige Kilbane and John MacIver joined the principle opinion. Judges Adrian Soud and John Harris individually concurred.

Share this article

Recent posts

Popular categories

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Recent comments