In re E.J. on Habeas Corpus. In re S.P. on Habeas Corpus. In re J.S. on Habeas Corpus. In re K.T — Werdegar, J…

Summary

Justice Werdegar concurred in the result that applying the 2,000-foot residency restriction as a parole condition to these petitioners did not constitute an impermissible retroactive or ex post facto application. She would locate the critical date at the time a registrant is found living in noncompliant housing, rather than at conviction or parole. She also agreed that the remaining constitutional claims should be remanded for factual development. Justice Moreno, dissenting, would have held that applying the restriction to persons convicted before Proposition 83 was retroactive and impermissible.