stating that courts should follow guidelines in conjunction with "relevant and reliable evidence" to reach "ultimate determination of the risk of reoffense posed by the registrant"
How later courts described this case
- stating that courts should follow guidelines in conjunction with "relevant and reliable evidence" to reach "ultimate determination of the risk of reoffense posed by the registrant"
- noting that for purposes of sex offender registry, courts must take care not “to abdicate decision-making responsibility to experts”
- listing factors that the Legislature has identified as indicative of the likelihood of a pedophile’s re-offense
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STEIN, J.,
concurring.
Although I have a separate view concerning the constitutionality of the retroactive application of the Community Notification Law, L. 1994, c. 128, see Doe v. Poritz, 142 N.J. 1, 111-47 , 662 A.2d 367 *90 (1995) (Stein, J., dissenting), I am in substantial accord with the Court’s disposition of the issues presented by this appeal.