Legal Opinion

Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided January 4, 2012No. 10-P-1699PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

As we noted in the Doe decision, the Legislature has enacted specific provisions toward ensuring that sex offenders who are currently confined are classified before they are released. Id. at 688, citing G. L. c. 6, §§ 178E(a), 178L(l)(a). In establishing the timetable of the required procedural steps, those provisions do not draw a distinction between confined sex offenders who are “incarcerated” and those who are otherwise held in custody.1 See G. L. c. 6, § 178E(a), as amended by St. 2006, c. 303, § 1 (requiring “the agency which has custody of [a] sex offender” to take a certain step…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Two JuvenilesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
  2. Doe v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
  3. Staman v. Board of AssessorsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1966
  4. Commonwealth v. BankertMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
  5. GagnonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Doe v. Sex Offender Registry BoardMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2012
  2. Timothy W. Miller v. Angela L. CarrollWisconsin Supreme Court · 2020
  3. Timothy W. Miller v. Angela L. CarrollWisconsin Supreme Court · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API