Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard a case where a sex offender who objected to wearing a GPS-monitoring device during his probation term. From the Boston Herald:
Allowing sex offenders to roam free without GPS monitoring has district attorneys joining forces to appeal to have judges granted the authority to slap the fiends with ankle bracelets.
The state Supreme Judicial Court yesterday heard both sides of the controversy in a case about a convicted Middlesex County child rapist who objected to wearing a GPS-monitoring device during his 10-year probation term.After he finished jail and civil sentences last summer, the Probation Department requested GPS monitoring for Goodwin.Superior Court Judge Kathe M. Tuttman, however, ruled she did not have the authority to impose the monitoring. In her ruling, Tuttman cited a 2009 SJC decision that decided a 2006 law mandating GPS devices on all sex offenders placed on probation cannot apply retroactively.
Goodwin’s attorney, Beth L. Eisenberg, also said Tuttman’s ruling found imposing GPS tracking amounted to impermissable punishment because he was in compliance with all the terms of his probation.
Since the summer, about 234 sex offenders have been allowed to remove their ankle bracelets as a result of the SJC ruling.
H/T: Sentencing Law & Policy.