Judge rules in favor of sex offender in residency case
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
CLEVELAND — Authorities cannot evict a convicted rapist whose home is near a school, a federal judge in Akron ordered Tuesday, ruling that the state's law limiting where sex offenders live is unconstitutional if applied to crimes committed before the law went into effect.
Lane Mikaloff, who served 16 years in prison for raping a woman, received an eviction notice in 2005 from the Summit County sheriff's office because of his home's proximity to McEbright Elementary School in Akron.
Extras
Mikaloff, who lived in the home with his partner, Mary Moffit, and their four children, filed a lawsuit in January 2006 in U.S. District Court challenging the order. He said being forced to vacate his home would destroy his family and the considerable efforts he's made to rebuild his life.
Judge James S. Gwin ruled that the law cannot be applied to sex offenders who committed crimes before July 31, 2003, the effective date of the Ohio Legislature's ban on offenders living within 1,000 feet of school property.
Gwin ruled that the law punishes sex offenders and ordered county Prosecutor Sherri Bevan Walsh not to enforce the law against Mikaloff.
John Manley, chief counsel with the Summit County prosecutor's office in Akron, said the prosecutor's staff disagreed with the ruling and that an appeal was likely.
"We maintain it's not a punitive measure, it's merely a protective measure," he said.
If not considered punishment, the law wouldn't violate the constitutional prohibition against imposing a new penalty retroactively, Manley said.
When the sex offender residency law was passed, only landlords, neighbors or schools could seek eviction of an offender violating that requirement. An amendment in 2005 gave legal officials in counties, municipalities and townships the authority to pursue eviction proceedings.
The Cincinnati-based Ohio Justice and Policy Center took Mikaloff's case to court. The center represents former inmates to help them become productive citizens.
"This is a landmark ruling that will have national impact as courts around the country address the growing number of such restrictions," said attorney David Singleton, the center's executive director.


