Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010), was a United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit case assessing the constitutionality of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5, a law that requires sex offenders to register their internet identifiers with the state in order to "assist in investigating kidnapping and sex-related crimes, and in apprehending offenders." In this case, a convicted sex offender, appearing anonymously as John Doe, appealed a decision by the United States District Court for the District of Utah to vacate an order enjoining the enforcement of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5. Even though Doe did not dispute the state's interest in enacting such a statute, he believed that the statute's enforcement ran afoul of his:

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010), was a United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit case assessing the constitutionality of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5, a law that requires sex offenders to register their internet identifiers with the state in order to "assist in investigating kidnapping and sex-related crimes, and in apprehending offenders." In this case, a convicted sex offender, appearing anonymously as John Doe, appealed a decision by the United States District Court for the District of Utah to vacate an order enjoining the enforcement of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5. Even though Doe did not dispute the state's interest in enacting such a statute, he believed that the statute's enforcement ran afoul of his: 1. * First Amendment right to engage in anonymous speech; 2. * Fourth Amendment rights to privacy and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure; and 3. * the Ex Post Facto Clause of the Constitution. Upon examining Doe's appeal, the Tenth Circuit determined that Utah's registration statute did not violate Doe's First or Fourth Amendment rights or the Ex Post Facto Clause, and therefore affirmed the lower court's decision to lift the injunction. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 34845240 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 716574511 (xsd:integer)
dbp:align
  • left
dbp:bgcolor
  • #F9F9F9
dbp:border
  • 0.800000 (xsd:double)
dbp:citations
  • 25920.0
dbp:court
dbp:decidedate
  • --10-26
dbp:decideyear
  • 2010 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fontsize
  • 75 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullname
  • John Doe v. Mark Shurtleff
dbp:holding
  • Affirmed District Court decision. Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5, a Utah statute requiring convicted sex offenders to register their online identifiers, does not violate the First or Fourth Amendments or the Ex Post Facto Clause.
dbp:judges
dbp:lawsapplied
  • Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60, First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Ex Post Facto Clause
dbp:litigants
  • Doe v. Shurtleff
dbp:majority
dbp:quote
  • The [state], to assist in investigating kidnapping and sex-related crimes, and in apprehending offenders, shall: develop and operate a system to collect, analyze, maintain, and disseminate information on offenders and sex and kidnap offenses; make information listed in Subsection available to the public [Subsection 27 contains a list of specific types of information, including the offender's physical address, physical description and vehicle license plate number, that must be made publicly available - it specifically excludes internet identifiers]; and share information provided by an offender under this section that may not be made available to the public under Subsection , but only: : for the purposes under this Subsection ; or : in accordance with [the Utah Government Records Access and Management Act].
dbp:source
  • Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5
dct:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010), was a United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit case assessing the constitutionality of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5, a law that requires sex offenders to register their internet identifiers with the state in order to "assist in investigating kidnapping and sex-related crimes, and in apprehending offenders." In this case, a convicted sex offender, appearing anonymously as John Doe, appealed a decision by the United States District Court for the District of Utah to vacate an order enjoining the enforcement of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5. Even though Doe did not dispute the state's interest in enacting such a statute, he believed that the statute's enforcement ran afoul of his: (en)
rdfs:label
  • Doe v. Shurtleff (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is foaf:primaryTopic of