Rainer v. State
Decision Date | 15 March 2010 |
Docket Number | No. S09A1900.,S09A1900. |
Citation | 690 S.E.2d 827 |
Parties | RAINER v. STATE of Georgia et al. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Ann Marie Fitz, Atlanta, for appellant.
Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Joseph J. Drolet, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Paige E. Boorman, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
After being convicted of robbery and false imprisonment of a minor in July 2001, and being released from prison in 2006, Jake Rainer was required to register as a sexual offender pursuant to OCGA § 42-1-12.1 On December 17, 2008, Rainer filed a declaratory action in the Superior Court of Fulton County, claiming that OCGA § 42-1-12 was unconstitutional as applied to him. The State moved to dismiss the complaint, and the trial court granted the State's motion to dismiss, finding that OCGA § 42-1-12 is constitutional. Rainer appeals from this ruling, arguing that, because the offenses for which he was convicted were not "sexual" in nature, requiring him to register as a "sexual offender" constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and arguing that OCGA § 42-1-12 violates substantive due process in that it is unconstitutionally over-inclusive. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Doe v. Miller, 405 F.3d 700, 723(V) n. 6 (8th Cir.2005).
Rainer's argument to the contrary is without merit. Specifically, because the registration requirements themselves do not constitute punishment, it is of no consequence whether or not one has committed an offense that is "sexual" in nature before being required to register. See Smith v. Doe, supra, 538 U.S. at 99(II)(B), 123 S.Ct. 1140 ( ). The nature of the offense requiring the registration would not somehow change the registration requirements themselves into a form of "punishment" for purposes of an Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment analysis. See Frazier, supra, 284 Ga. at 639(1), 668 S.E.2d 646 () (citation and punctuation omitted).
(Citations and punctuation omitted.) State of Ga. v. Old South Amusements, 275 Ga. 274, 277(2), 564 S.E.2d 710 (2002).
Here, there is no contention that Rainer is a member of a suspect class, and Rainer has no fundamental right, as one who has falsely imprisoned a minor and who is not the child's parent, to avoid the registration requirements of OCGA § 42-1-12. See Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 720(II), 117 S.Ct. 2258, 138 L.Ed.2d 772 (1997) ( )(citation and punctuation omitted). Thus, the statute at issue here will be "examined under the rational basis test, the least rigorous level of constitutional scrutiny." Old South Amusements, supra, 275 Ga. at 277(2), 564 S.E.2d 710.
(Citations and punctuation omitted). Old South Amusements, supra, 275 Ga. at 278(2), 564 S.E.2d 710. See also Nichols v. Gross, 282 Ga. 811, 813, 653 S.E.2d 747 (2007) ( )(citation and punctuation omitted).
Here, it is rational to conclude that requiring those who falsely imprison minors who are not the child's parent to register pursuant to OCGA § 42-1-12 advances the State's legitimate goal of informing the public for purposes of protecting children from those who would harm them. Indeed, it is not unreasonable or completely arbitrary to believe that a child may be more at risk of harm from someone who would falsely imprison the child who is not the child's parent.
(Citations and punctuation omitted.) Old South Amusements, supra, 275 Ga. at 278(2), 564 S.E.2d 710. OCGA § 42-1-12 does not violate substantive due process. Id.
(Citations and punctuation omitted.) FCC v. Beach Communications, 508 U.S. 307, 315(II), 113 S.Ct. 2096, 124 L.Ed.2d 211 (1993).
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur, except HUNSTEIN, C.J., and BENHAM, J., who dissent.
Because the definition of "criminal offense against a victim who is a minor" found in OCGA § 42-1-12(a)(9) is unconstitutionally over-inclusive, I respectfully dissent to Division 2 of the majority opinion and to the affirmance of the trial court's ruling.
In May 2000, 18-year-old Jake Rainer and three acquaintances arranged to buy drugs from the 17-year-old victim, planning to take her money and drugs after picking her up at an agreed-upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ga. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Steiner
...offender registry—which we have also found to be a civil regulatory scheme that is not punitive in nature, see Rainer v. State , 286 Ga. 675, 675-676, 690 S.E.2d 827 (2010).The superior court was incorrect when it found that the registry is punitive in effect because it precludes those iden......
-
People v. Bosca
...the public and did not violate the defendant's right to due process or equal protection under the law); Rainer v. State, 286 Ga. 675, 676–679, 690 S.E.2d 827 (Ga., 2010) (holding that the requirement of sex offender registration for the defendant's conviction of false imprisonment of a mino......
-
State v. Mossman
...by the fact that the Georgia Supreme Court in Wiggins v. State, 288 Ga. 169, 172, 702 S.E.2d 865 (2010), and Rainer v. State of Georgia, 286 Ga. 675, 675–76, 690 S.E.2d 827 (2010), without citing to its earlier decision in Bradshaw, rejected arguments that a sentence was cruel and unusual p......
-
State v. Coleman, 2 CA–CR 2015–0419
...requirement at issue here does not run afoul of substantive due process or equal protection guarantees. See, e.g., Rainer v. State , 286 Ga. 675, 690 S.E.2d 827, 829–30 (2010) (registration requirement for defendant's conviction of false imprisonment of a minor did not violate substantive d......
-
SEX OFFENDERS AND THE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION.
...as a sex offender by any individual convicted "of a criminal offense against a victim who is a minor"); see also Rainer v. State, 690 S.E.2d 827 (Ga. 2010) (upholding registration requirement for eighteen-year-old who pleaded guilty to robbery and false imprisonment of a seventeen-year-old)......
-
Creating a Civil Remedy in Georgia for Survivors of Out-of-state Childhood Sexual Abuse
...a two-prong evaluation of the challenged statute.").96. Id. at 561, 738 S.E.2d at 588 (citing Rainer v. State, 286 Ga. 675, 677-78, 690 S.E.2d 827, 829 (2010)).97. Harvey, 311 Ga. at 821, 860 S.E.2d at 572.98. Id. (quoting City of Marietta v. Summerour, 302 Ga. 645, 649, 807 S.E.2d 324, 328......
-
Does the Punishment Fit the Crime?: Applying Eighth Amendment Proportionality Analysis to Georgia's Sex Offender Registration Statute and Residency and Employment Restrictions for Juvenile Offenders
...1, at 520. 37. West, supra note 2, at 248 (quoting Doe v. Miller, 405 F.3d 700, 719 (8th Cir. 2005)). 38. See generally Rainer v. State, 690 S.E.2d 827 (Ga. 2010); Mann v. Ga. Dept. of Corr., 653 S.E.2d 740 (Ga. 2007); Whitaker v. Perdue, No. 4:06-CV-140-CC (N.D. Ga. filed July 20, 2006). 3......