Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,608
- 910
A federal appeals court in St. Louis heard oral arguments Tuesday about whether the state of Minnesota’s sex offender treatment program violates the Constitution with its practice of indefinite detention.
The case before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals could force the state to make a series of politically unpopular reforms to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP), which has come under fire for its failure to release more offenders into the community.
Last June U.S. District Court Judge Donovan Frank in St. Paul, ruling in a lawsuit brought by a group of sex offenders, declared the program unconstitutional and ordered sweeping changes. The judge ordered the state to conduct more regular evaluations of the 725 rapists, child molesters and other offenders confined at secure treatment centers in Moose Lake and St. Peter, and to release those who no longer require confinement. The judge also ordered the state to develop less-restrictive treatment options in the community. The appeals court put Frank’s order on hold until a three-judge panel could heard Minnesota’s appeal.
Much of Minnesota’s appeal centers on whether Frank had improperly taken sides before a contentious, six-week federal trial early last year on the program’s constitutionality.
In Tuesday’s hearing in St. Louis, attorneys representing Minnesota pointed to a series of comments Frank made before the trial, to argue that he had “prejudged” the case. In February 2014, a full year before the trial, Frank referred to the MSOP as “clearly broken” and said “the interests of justice require that substantial changes be made.” A week before the trial, Frank admonished leaders in the legislative and executive branches, saying they had “let politics, rather than the rule of law and the rights of `all’ its citizens guide their decisions.”
Appeals court hears challenge to constitutionality of Minnesota Sex Offender Program
Unfortunately, he did "take sides".
The case before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals could force the state to make a series of politically unpopular reforms to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP), which has come under fire for its failure to release more offenders into the community.
Last June U.S. District Court Judge Donovan Frank in St. Paul, ruling in a lawsuit brought by a group of sex offenders, declared the program unconstitutional and ordered sweeping changes. The judge ordered the state to conduct more regular evaluations of the 725 rapists, child molesters and other offenders confined at secure treatment centers in Moose Lake and St. Peter, and to release those who no longer require confinement. The judge also ordered the state to develop less-restrictive treatment options in the community. The appeals court put Frank’s order on hold until a three-judge panel could heard Minnesota’s appeal.
Much of Minnesota’s appeal centers on whether Frank had improperly taken sides before a contentious, six-week federal trial early last year on the program’s constitutionality.
In Tuesday’s hearing in St. Louis, attorneys representing Minnesota pointed to a series of comments Frank made before the trial, to argue that he had “prejudged” the case. In February 2014, a full year before the trial, Frank referred to the MSOP as “clearly broken” and said “the interests of justice require that substantial changes be made.” A week before the trial, Frank admonished leaders in the legislative and executive branches, saying they had “let politics, rather than the rule of law and the rights of `all’ its citizens guide their decisions.”
Appeals court hears challenge to constitutionality of Minnesota Sex Offender Program
Unfortunately, he did "take sides".
