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. — Moreno, J…

Summary

Justice Moreno dissented from the majority's conclusion that applying the Proposition 83 residency restriction to these petitioners was prospective rather than retroactive. He would hold that the restriction attaches new legal consequences to the petitioners' earlier sex-offense convictions and therefore cannot be applied absent clear evidence of retroactive intent. He further reasoned that the cases should be remanded for factual consideration of the petitioners' as-applied constitutional challenges, including intrastate-travel concerns. Justice Werdegar, concurring, agreed with the result but would identify the date of living in noncompliant housing, rather than conviction or parole, as the critical date and emphasized the narrow scope of the decision.