Legal Opinion · Dissent

Santos v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 27, 2008No. S08A1296Published

1DissentCarley, Justice

As I understand the majority opinion, it holds that the sex offender registration requirements of OCGA § 42-1-12 with respect to the offender’s address are unconstitutionally vague as applied to homeless sex offenders who do not possess a street or route address, including those who have just lost such an address. The majority clearly does not hold that such an offender, including Santos, is exempt either from updating other required information as it changes or from renewing his registration annually pursuant to OCGA § 42-1-12 (f) (4). However, the majority opinion ignores basic principles…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Patel v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2007
  2. Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1997
  3. Mayor of Savannah v. Savannah Electric & Power Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1949
  4. Twine v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  5. State v. RubeyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API