Legal Opinion
Doe 1 v. Williams
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided September 19, 2001No. CIV. A. 01-00407(ESH)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HUVELLE, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, John Does # 1-5, are five individuals required to register as sex offenders pursuant to the District of Columbia’s 1999 Sex Offender and Registration Act (“SORA”), D.C.Code § 22-4001, et seq. (2001). 1 They attack the constitutionality of the SORA, arguing, inter alia, that it violates the Due Process Clause, the Ex Post Facto Clause and the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution. Defendants Anthony Williams, May- or of the District of Columbia, Charles H. Ramsey, Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department (“MPD”), and…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Carey v. PiphusSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Doe v. Dept. of Public Safety ex rel. LeeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Milks v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Florida · 2004
- Fullmer v. Michigan Department of State PoliceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2002
- Miskowski v. MartinCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.