Cleverly Lockhart v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
2015 Ind. App. LEXIS 701
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- In 1994 Lockhart was convicted by a jury of multiple counts of child molesting; he is serving a long executed sentence with earliest release in 2021.
- Indiana’s Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) took effect July 1, 1994; Wallace v. State later held SORA unconstitutional as applied to offenders whose crimes, convictions, and sentences occurred before SORA’s enactment.
- In June 2014 DOC sent Lockhart an unsigned notice indicating DOC intended to forward his information to the State Sex and Violent Offender Registry prior to his release.
- Lockhart administratively protested and then filed a verified petition under Ind. Code § 11-8-8-22 seeking removal from the Registry on ex post facto grounds (relying on Wallace).
- At filing Lockhart’s name was not on the public Sex Offender Registry; the State moved to dismiss under Trial Rule 12(B)(6) arguing there was no present registration to remove and thus no claim for relief.
- The trial court granted the dismissal; Lockhart’s reconsideration was denied and he appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lockhart stated a claim to remove his name from the Registry under I.C. § 11-8-8-22 based on ex post facto injury | Lockhart: DOC’s notice and intent to register him creates a present ex post facto injury ripe for relief under Wallace and § 11-8-8-22 | State: Lockhart’s name was not on the Registry and no registration requirement was presently imposed, so there is no relief the court can grant now | Court: Dismissal affirmed—petition failed to state a claim because no present registration or immediate injury existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Wallace v. State, 905 N.E.2d 371 (Ind. 2009) (SORA held unconstitutional as applied to offenders whose crimes and sentences predated SORA)
- Snyder v. Town of Yorktown, 20 N.E.3d 545 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (standard of review for Trial Rule 12(B)(6) dismissal)
- Veolia Water Indpls., LLC v. Nat’l Trust Ins. Co., 3 N.E.3d 1 (Ind. 2014) (pleading sufficiency principles for Rule 12(B)(6))
- Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC v. Kephart, 934 N.E.2d 1120 (Ind. 2010) (procedural authority cited for de novo review of dismissal)