The ACLU of Oklahoma has successfully concluded its representation of an unidentified plaintiff in an action filed against defendants within Oklahoma County. The case of Doe v. Lane was filed during January in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.
John Doe, the ACLU’s anonymous client in the lawsuit, challenged the enforcement of residential restrictions for sex offenders. His identity was protected by an order of the Court issued on January 27, 2006.
The Oklahoma City Police Department was attempting to unfairly enforce a state law that prohibited registered sex offenders from residing within a 2,000 feet radius of a school or educational institution. Doe had tried to comply with the regulation and had even sold a house he had purchased after being informed by the Oklahoma City Police Department Registry Division that it was too close to a school and that he would be arrested if he did not move within 60 days.
Doe subsequently bought another house after consulting with the Registry Division, which assured him that could legally reside in that location. Several months later, he was contacted by the Oklahoma City Police Department and told that “new and improved” measuring techniques and “new” legal interpretations indicated that his recently purchased home was also too close to a school.
ACLU of Oklahoma’s former Staff Attorney Tina Izadi filed suit on behalf of Doe on January 26, 2006 and alleged that his due process and other rights were being violated by the police and district attorney’s office. After a court appearance, a temporary restraining order from the Oklahoma County District Court and extensive negotiation, the defendants agreed to settle the case.
Wes Lane, former District Attorney for Oklahoma County, in his official capacity and the District Attorney’s Office for Oklahoma County’s employees, agents and its office agreed to refrain from initiating criminal prosecution to enforce 57 O.S. Section 590 against Doe for the duration of time that Doe remains at his present address, including any and all enforcement steps and/or proceedings and any revocation proceedings as a result of his residence.
William Citty, Chief of Police for City of Oklahoma City, in his official capacity, and The City of Oklahoma City Police Department’s employees, agents and its office agreed to refrain from initiating criminal prosecution to enforce 57 O.S. Section 590 against Plaintiff for the duration of time that Plaintiff remains at his present address, including any and all enforcement steps and/or proceedings.
As part of the settlement, the parties were prohibited from publicly identifying Doe and providing any identifying information about him to any person or entity not directly involved in the resolution and the future enforcement of the agreement in accord with the terms of the Court’s Order granting the Plaintiff’s Protective Order on January 27, 2006.