Legal Opinion

N.L. v. State of Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 2013No. 47S01-1302-JV-126PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RUSH, Justice.

Sex-offender registration aims to protect innocent members of society from repeat sex offenses by formerly convicted sex offenders, while our juvenile system aims to rehabilitate juvenile offenders. To balance these competing goals in light of registration’s serious social consequences and far-reaching effects, trial courts may place a child on the sex offender registry only if they first find by clear and convincing evidence that the child is likely to repeat a sex offense. But our trial courts have struggled with how to apply that statutory requirement. Today, we clarify that…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Wallace v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Estate of Reasor v. Putnam CountyIndiana Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Sloan v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Nicoson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2010

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Joseph K. Buelna v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State of Indiana v. I.T.Indiana Supreme Court · 2014
  3. M.T v. v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2016
  4. Somchanh Amphonephong v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. J.D.M. v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2017

14 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