Exile at home: The unintended collateral consequences of sex offender residency restrictions

Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 531-540

  Tewksbury, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548606849     PISSN: 00178039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (76)

1. GA. CODE ANN. § 42-1-15 (Supp. 2006).
2. Collateral consequences are those effects, both intended and unintended, arising from the restrictions.
3. See Velmer S. Burton, Jr., Francis T. Cullen & Kathleen M. Olivares, The Collateral Consequences of a Felony Conviction: A National Study of State Legal Codes 10 Years Later, 60 FED. PROBATION 10, 11-14 (1996);
4. Velmer S. Burton, Jr., Francis T. Cullen & Lawrence F. Travis III, The Collateral Consequences of a Felony Conviction: A National Study of State Statutes, 51 FED. PROBATION 52, 54-58 (1987).
5. See Erving Goffman, STIGMA: NOTES ON THE MANAGEMENT OF A SPOILED IDENTITY (1963);
6. Mary Dodge, Paul Katsampes & Mark Pogrebin, The Collateral Costs of Short-Term Jail Incarceration: The Long-Term Social and Economic Disruptions, 5 CORRECTIONS MGMT. Q. 64, 65-66 (2001);
7. Mary Dodge & Mark R. Pogrebin, Collateral Costs of Imprisonment for Women: Complications of Reintegration, 81 PRISON J. 42, 42-43 (2001).
8. See generally Richard Tewksbury, Collateral Consequences of Sex Offender Registration, 21 J. CONTEMP. CRIM. JUST. 67, 67-79 (2005) (canvassing negative consequences particular to RSOs);
9. Richard Tewksbury & Matthew Lees, Perceptions of Sex Offender Registration: Collateral Consequences and Community Experiences, 26 SOC. SPECTRUM 309, 330-33 (2006).
10. See Jill S. Levenson & Leo P. Cotter, The Effects of Megan's Law on Sex Offender Reintegration, J. CONTEMP. CRIM. JUST. 49, 54 (2005); Tewksbury, supra note 5, at 72.
11. Richard Tewksbury, Experiences and Attitudes of Registered Female Sex Offenders, 68 FED. PROBATION 30, 31 (2004).
12. Tewksbury, supra note 5, at 75.
13. Id.
14. Tewksbury, supra note 7, at 32. Less commonly, women experienced threatening or harassing phone calls and mail, assault, and requests to leave a business. Id.
15. Levenson & Cotter, supra note 6, at 54.
16. Id. at 62.
17. See, e.g., Tewksbury, supra note 5, at 72-74; Tewksbury, supra note 7, at 31.
18. Levenson & Cotter, supra note 6, at 58.
19. Id.
20. Id.
21. See Tewksbury & Lees, supra note 5, at 316.
22. Id.
23. Id. at 319; see also Richard G. Zevitz & Mary A. Farkas, Sex Offender Community Notification: Assessing the Impact in Wisconsin, RES. BRIEF (Nat'l Inst. Of Justice), Dec. 2000, at 9-10 (interview of 30 RSOs in Wisconsin found that 83% reported difficulties finding or maintaining a residence; 77% reported harassment or threats; 77% were ostracized by neighbors or acquaintances; 67% reported emotional harm to family members as a result of their registration; and 57% reported loss of employment).
24. Tewksbury & Lees, supra note 5, at 329.
25. Id. at 330-33.
26. Id.; see also Richard Zevitz & Mary A. Farkas, Sex Offender Community Notification: Managing High Risk Criminals or Exacting Further Vengeance?, 18 BEHAV. SCI. & L. 371, 375-91 (2000) (data collected from citizens at community notification meetings in Wisconsin showing strong community resistance to the presence of RSOs).
27. See Keri B. Burchfield & William Mingus, Not In My Neighborhood: Assessing Registered Sex Offenders' Experiences with Local Social Capital and Social Control (Nov. 1, 2006) (unpublished manuscript, presented at annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, on file with the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review).
28. Id.
29. Id.
30. Id.
31. Id.
32. See Tewksbury, supra note 5, at 68-69; Zevitz & Farkas, supra note 19, at 9-10.
33. Tewksbury, supra note 5, at 75.
34. Tewksbury, supra note 7, at 32.
35. Zevitz & Farkas, supra note 19, at 9-10.
36. Tewksbury & Lees, supra note 5, at 313-14.
37. Id. at 322-25.
38. 720 ILL. COMP. STAT. § 5/11-9.3(b-5) (2004).
39. Burchfield & Mingus, supra note 23.
40. Elizabeth E. Mustaine, Richard Tewksbury & Kenneth M. Stengel, Social Disorganization and Residential Locations of Registered Sex Offenders: Is this a Collateral Consequence?, 27 DEVIANT BEHAV. 329, 336 (2006).
41. RSO-dense census tracts have ten or more RSOs.
42. Mustaine, Tewksbury & Stengel, supra note 44, at 342.
43. Id. at 344.
44. Elizabeth E. Mustaine & Richard Tewksbury, Registered Sex Offenders, Residence, and the Influence of Race, 5 J. ETHNICITY CRIM. JUST. (forthcoming 2007) (on file with authors).
45. Id. (manuscript at 17).
46. Id.
47. Richard Tewksbury & Elizabeth E. Mustaine, Collateral Consequences and Community Re-entry for Registered Sex Offenders with Child Victims: Are the Challenges Even Greater? (Mar. 2007) (unpublished manuscript, presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, on file with author).
48. Id. (manuscript at 19-20).
49. Elizabeth E. Mustaine, Richard Tewksbury & Kenneth M. Stengel, Residential Location and Mobility of Registered Sex Offenders, 30 AM. J. CRIM. JUST. 177, 185-92 (2006).
50. Id.
51. Id.
52. Id.
53. Erica Turley & Laura Hutzel, W. VA. DIV. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVS., WEST VIRGINIA SEX OFFENDER STUDY 7 (2001), available at http://www.wvdcjs.com/publications.
54. Id. at 20.
55. Id. at 21.
56. Levenson & Cotter, supra note 6, at 58; Jill S. Levenson & Leo P. Cotter, Impact of Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: One Thousand Feet from Danger or One Step from Absurd?, 49 INT'L J. OFFENDER THERAPY & COMP. CRIMINOLOGY 168, 173 (2005)
57. [hereinafter Levenson & Cotter, Impact of Residence Restrictions].
58. Levenson & Cotter, Impact of Residence Restrictions, supra note 52, at 172.
59. Id. at 173.
60. See Sarah Geraghty, Challenging the Banishment of Registered Sex Offenders from the State of Georgia: A Practitioner's Perspective, 42 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 513, 515, n.7 (2007).
61. Id. at 514.
62. Jeffrey T. Walker, James W. Golden & Amy C. VanHouten, The Geographic Link Between Sex Offenders and Potential Victims: A Routine Activities Approach, 3 JUST. RES. & POL'Y 15, 30-32 (2001).
63. Richard Tewksbury & Elizabeth E. Mustaine, Where To Find Sex Offenders: An Examination of Residential Locations and Neighborhood Conditions, 19 CRIM. JUST. STUD. 61, 70-75 (2006).
64. Paul A. Zandbergen & Timothy C. Hart, Reducing Housing Options for Convicted Sex Offenders: Investigating the Impact of Residency Restriction Laws Using GIS, 8 JUST. RES. & POL'Y 1, 1-24 (2006).
65. Id.
66. Id.
67. Id.
68. Id.
69. Kenneth M. Stengel, Richard Tewksbury & Elizabeth E. Mustaine, Examining Rates of Sexual Offenses from a Routine Activities Perspective, VICTIMS & OFFENDERS (forthcoming 2007) (manuscript at 12-15, on file with authors).
70. DIV. OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, COLO. DEP'T OF PUB. SAFETY, REPORT ON SAFETY ISSUES RAISED BY LIVING ARRANGEMENTS FOR AND LOCATION OF SEX OFFENDERS IN THE COMMUNITY 38-39 (2004).
71. GRANT DUWE, WILLIAM DONNAY & RICHARD TEWKSBURY, MINN. DEP'T OF CORR., DOES RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY MATTER? A SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF SEX OFFENSE RECIDIVISM (2006) (on file with author).
72. Id.
73. Id.
74. Id.
75. Am. Corr. Ass'n, Resolution on Neighborhood Exclusion of Predatory Sex Offenders (Jan. 24, 2007).
76. See Geraghty, supra note 55.