Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Rockland's residency law for sex offenders challenged again in court
A sex offender is taking a second stab at challenging the constitutionality of a Rockland law that limits where he and others can live in the county.
Yoel Oberlander, 28, of Monsey argued in court papers that the county law pre-empted state law and therefore should be voided.
The Rockland County Attorney's Office defends the 2007 law as valid, as no New York state court has ruled on the issues being raised by Oberlander.
The county law prohibits high-risk sex offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of schools, libraries, public pools, day-care facilities or other facilities that cater to children. The law empowers police to investigate people found in those areas who are considered suspicious.
Violating the law brings a misdemeanor charge.
Oberlander's court papers, filed Monday in state Supreme Court, cited a New Jersey court ruling that voided local living zones for sex offenders as conflicting with that state's law.
Oberlander also argued that the Rockland law was not consistent because it allowed sex offenders to live within the zones if they were there before the law was enacted.
The Rockland law, he argues, defies the state law's desire to integrate sex offenders within the community, rather than creating enclaves within the county.
It also usurps the expertise of Probation Department officers, who once approved residences for offenders. Included within the 1,000-foot buffers are passive parks that are not often used, further eliminating living areas.
"In Rockland County, unfortunate[ly] for the County Legislature, there is not a 'devil's island,'" Oberlander argued in his papers.
The County Attorney's Office countered that no New York state court had ruled on the pre-emption issue so therefore the law was valid.
"Nothing has changed, and it's a local law that is presumed valid," County Attorney Patricia Zugibe said.
The county Legislature adopted the law and County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef signed it in 2007, though some legislators said they had misgivings about its potential efficacy.
http://lohud.com/article/20081029/NEWS03/810290385/-1/newsfront
Yoel Oberlander, 28, of Monsey argued in court papers that the county law pre-empted state law and therefore should be voided.
The Rockland County Attorney's Office defends the 2007 law as valid, as no New York state court has ruled on the issues being raised by Oberlander.
The county law prohibits high-risk sex offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of schools, libraries, public pools, day-care facilities or other facilities that cater to children. The law empowers police to investigate people found in those areas who are considered suspicious.
Violating the law brings a misdemeanor charge.
Oberlander's court papers, filed Monday in state Supreme Court, cited a New Jersey court ruling that voided local living zones for sex offenders as conflicting with that state's law.
Oberlander also argued that the Rockland law was not consistent because it allowed sex offenders to live within the zones if they were there before the law was enacted.
The Rockland law, he argues, defies the state law's desire to integrate sex offenders within the community, rather than creating enclaves within the county.
It also usurps the expertise of Probation Department officers, who once approved residences for offenders. Included within the 1,000-foot buffers are passive parks that are not often used, further eliminating living areas.
"In Rockland County, unfortunate[ly] for the County Legislature, there is not a 'devil's island,'" Oberlander argued in his papers.
The County Attorney's Office countered that no New York state court had ruled on the pre-emption issue so therefore the law was valid.
"Nothing has changed, and it's a local law that is presumed valid," County Attorney Patricia Zugibe said.
The county Legislature adopted the law and County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef signed it in 2007, though some legislators said they had misgivings about its potential efficacy.
http://lohud.com/article/20081029/NEWS03/810290385/-1/newsfront
Comments:
just sick. like he can't find any other place to live other than near children.
Post a Comment
Comment Credit ---This article posted by 
: October 31, 2008 2:27 PM
: October 31, 2008 2:27 PM
