Monitors taken off four sex offenders

Judge's ruling is latest setback for N.C.; issue could reach Supreme Court

RALEIGH -- Four sex offenders hooked to satellite tracking systems had ankle bracelets and signal boxes removed after a Wake Superior Court judge ruled they shouldn't be subject to lifetime monitoring.

The ruling Thursday by Judge Ripley Rand was the latest rejection of the state's attempts to track sex offenders who have finished their sentences. Across the state, 122 people are subject to tracking, and many are contesting it.

Court decisions in North Carolina and other states may result in a more definitive ruling by a higher court, experts and lawyers say.

"The courts, us, everybody is a little confused," said Hannah Rowland, who manages the monitoring program for the N.C. Department of Correction. "We're all trying to work this out as best as we can."

The four offenders had the $1,400 units removed after Rand's Thursday's decision. They joined 21 sex offenders who have fought North Carolina and had judges side with them.

The state legislature in 2006 and 2007 required lifetime satellite monitoring for sex criminals classified as repeat offenders, aggravated offenders or violent predators, or who had victimized children. The correction department spends nearly $3,000 a year tracking a single offender.

But defense attorneys around the state have raised questions about the constitutionality of the program, with the latest round of petitions aired in Wake County after an earlier ruling in Cumberland County. They argue that the sex offenders have served their punishments and shouldn't be subject to the close monitoring.

North Carolina started its registry in 1996, requiring people convicted of certain sex crimes -- particularly repeat or violent offenders -- to register their address and making their images and conviction data public. The legislature has created more oversight as public concerns about sex offenders increased, said John Rubin, a UNC-Chapel Hill professor who has studied the programs.

"The Constitution would prohibit punishments created after the fact," Rubin said. "That is the question that is going to be raised and addressed by the court."

This issue could end up before a state or federal appeals court -- and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court -- as other states grapple with similar cases.

Technical problems noted

The correction department and district attorney's offices have asked for clarification from the N.C. Attorney General's Office, said Julia White, a spokeswoman for that office. None has been issued.

In his ruling, Rand skirted constitutional issues brought up by Charles Caldwell, a Wake public defender. Caldwell had said the monitoring violated the men's constitutional rights, punishing them further for crimes they had been convicted of years ago.

The system, consisting of an ankle bracelet and signal unit that attaches to the waist, weighs several pounds and was beset by technical problems, Caldwell wrote in court motions. They went off during thunderstorms, and signals were interrupted inside workplaces or in malls and churches. The unit gives off a beeping sound, and the offender has to go outside to wait for the signal to re-connect with the satellite.

Caldwell also questioned why the correction department purchased a system that required daily charging, forcing an offender to stay home at least six hours a day. Scientists use similar devices to track wildlife, with bracelets that are lighter, less obvious and have no need to be recharged.

"A bear in the wild has a less conspicuous monitor that a human being on the street," Caldwell wrote.

The basis of Rand's ruling, however, was that the state couldn't require monitoring because the crimes occurred before the law took effect Dec. 1. He did not address the question of double punishment.

Rowland said the correction department will continue to screen offenders. After that, it's up to judges to decide whether they should be monitored.

"We are at the mercy of the courts," she said.

(News researcher Brooke Cain contributed to this report.)