Proposition 83 of 2006 (also known as theSexual Predator Punishment and Control Act: Jessica's Law or simply,Jessica's Law) was astatute enacted by 70% ofCalifornia voters on November 7, 2006, authored by State SenatorGeorge Runner (R-Antelope Valley) and State AssemblywomanSharon Runner (R-Antelope Valley). It was proposed by means of theinitiative process as a version of theJessica's Law proposals that had been considered in other states.
The Act was a lengthy and complex measure that made many changes to theCalifornia Penal Code and theWelfare and Institutions Code. Its provisions increased the penalties for sex offenders, broadened the definition of certain sexual offenses, eliminated good time credits for early release of certain offenders, prohibitedprobation for certain crimes, extended parole for some offenses, increased court-imposed fees on sex offenders and provided for lifelongGPS monitoring of high risk sex offenders. The law also barred convicted sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or any place where children gather—effectively blocking them from living in the vast majority of the areas of large California cities, until the provision was found unconstitutional bySupreme Court of California in March 2015.[1] Under the law, a sex offender with a minimum of one victim and any previous criminal history may becivilly committed for an indefinite period.[2]
The law was sponsored by husband and wife legislatorsState Senator George Runner (R-Antelope Valley) andState Assemblywoman Sharon Runner (R-Antelope Valley). It was supported by Governor Schwarzenegger and law enforcement throughout the state. California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (acriminal defense attorneys association) opposed Proposition 83 and wrote the opposing argument for the voter pamphlet. They argued the restrictions would cause problems with finding a place of residence for freed convicts.[3]
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
 Yes | 5,926,800 | 70.5 |
| No | 2,483,597 | 29.5 |
| Total votes | 8,410,397 | 100.00 |
In November 2006, enforcement of the new law was initially blocked in four counties by U.S. District JudgeSusan Illston who ruled in a lawsuit filed by an existing offender based on its retroactive nature.[5] However, three months later, U.S. District JudgeJeffrey White dismissed that lawsuit.[6] In 2010, theSupreme Court of California ruled that the residency requirements of Jessica's Law could be applied retroactively.[7] On September 12, 2012, a state appeals court blocked enforcement of the residency requirements of Jessica's Law for all paroled sex offenders in San Diego County, affirming a lower court ruling, stating that it was an unconstitutional blanket condition of parole that "limits the housing choices of all sex offenders identically, without regard to the type of victim or the risk of reoffending."[8] During 2014RSOL's Californian chapter CA RSOL sued over 20 municipalities[9] in federal court over sex offender ordinances[10][11][12] causing at least 44 other municipalities to either repeal or quit enforcing their ordinances in order to avoid litigation.[13] In March 2015Supreme Court of California deemed blanket residency restrictions unconstitutional citing theircounterproductive effect and unfairness.[1]
TheCalifornia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has stated that every registered sex offender paroled after the law's enactment in 2006 is wearing a GPS device.[14] However, CDCR is responsible for only 11% of California's sex offenders statewide,[14] and "only a fraction of the state's registered sex offenders wear a GPS unit".[15]