041568P.pdf   08/08/2005  John Doe  v.  Tom Miller
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-1568
   Southern District of Iowa   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Riley and Melloy, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Appellate Procedure. See the Court's opinion in Doe V. 
   Miller, 405 F.3d 700 (8th Cir. 2005), which rejects appellants' 
   constitutional challenges to the residency restrictions of Iowa Code Sec. 
   692A.2A. Appellant's Motion to Stay the Issuance of Mandate pending 
   the filing of petition for certiorari is denied. 
  
041568P.pdf   04/29/2005  John Doe  v.  Tom Miller
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-1568
   Southern District of Iowa   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Riley and Melloy, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case. The Constitution of the United States does not prevent Iowa
   from regulating the residency of sex offenders in order to protect the
   health and safety of its citizens, and the district court erred in finding
   Iowa Code 692A.2A unconstitutional; the panel holds unanimously that
   the residency restrictions imposed by the statute are not unconstitutional
   on their face; by a 2 to 1 majority, the panel concludes the statute does
   not amount to unconstitutional ex post facto punishment of person who
   committed offenses prior to July 1, 2002, the effective date of the statute,
   because the plaintiffs have not established by the "clearest proof," as
   required under Supreme Court precedent, that the punitive effect of the
   statute overrides the General Assembly's legitimate intent to enact a
   nonpunitive, civil regulatory measure that protects health and safety. 
   Judge Melloy dissenting on the ex post facto issue, and concurring with
   the remainder of the opinion.