Pivic v. Pittard

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that registration was similar to probation and dissemination of his information was the equivalent of shaming
• holding that the Maryland sex offense registry statute, which is expressly made retroactive, violates the Maryland constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws
• concluding that “the harms caused by dissemination . . . render[ed]” Maryland’s sex offender registration law “the equivalent of the punishment of shaming” and noting examples of lost housing “quite similar to expulsion from the community” (emphasis added)
• noting that Maryland’s similar sex offender registry “obligations have the same practical effect as placing [the registrant] on probation or parole”
• explaining that, “[t]he use of the word ‘or’ indicates that an issue must be raised in or decided by the trial court, but it is not necessary for both to occur to preserve the issue for appellate review”
• electing to invoke Maryland Constitution to provide broader protection than federal Ex Post Facto Clause

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).