United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
TIMOTHY D. DeGIUSTI, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
the Court is Defendant City of Oklahoma City's
(“Oklahoma City”) Motion for Summary Judgment
[Doc. No. 31]. Plaintiff has responded [Doc. No. 32]. The
matter is fully briefed and at issue.
has owned a residence at 2813 Shady Tree Lane in Oklahoma
City since August 6, 1993. The residence is within 2000 feet
of multiple common areas allegedly owned or operated by
various homeowners associations (“HOA”).
Plaintiff resided in the residence at 2813 Shady Tree Lane
until his convictions and incarceration in May 2002.
15, 2002, Plaintiff pleaded guilty to charges of First Degree
Rape, Indecent or Lewd Acts with A Child Under Sixteen, and
Indecent Exposure. As a result of these convictions,
Plaintiff is required to register as a convicted sex offender
pursuant to the Oklahoma Sex Offenders Registration Act
(“OSORA”), Okla. Stat. tit. 57, §§
was discharged from prison and registered as a sex offender
in January 2012. In March 2012, Plaintiff was charged with
two counts of Lewd Acts with a Child Under Sixteen and on
August 7, 2015, he was convicted on those charges and
sentenced to fourteen (14) years imprisonment, all but the
first four years suspended, to run concurrent with his
sentence for his previous convictions.
November 1, 2015, amendments to Okla. Stat. tit. 57, §
590 became effective, which made it:
unlawful for any person registered pursuant to the Sex
Offenders Registration Act to reside, either temporarily or
permanently, within a two thousand-foot radius of any . . .
playground or park that is established, operated or supported
in whole or in part by a homeowners' association or a
city, town, county, state, federal or tribal government, or a
licensed child care center as defined by the Department of
Stat. tit. 57, § 590(A). “Park” is defined
in the statutes as “any outdoor public area
specifically designated as being used for recreational
purposes that is operated or supported in whole or in part by
a homeowners' association or a city, town, county, state,
federal or tribal governmental
authority.” Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1125. These
are the same restrictions and definitions acknowledged by
Plaintiff when he initialed each paragraph of, and signed,
the Notice of Duty to Register prior to his release from
incarceration in December 2016. Notice of Duty to Register
(Pursuant to Title 57, Sections 581-590.2 and Title 21,
Section 1125 of the Oklahoma State Statutes) [Doc. No. 31-6]
at ¶¶ 9 and 10.
day of his release, December 30, 2016, Plaintiff registered
with the Oklahoma City Police Department as a transient and
has continued to register as a transient since that date.
filed the instant action on May 3, 2017, and Oklahoma City
removed the case to this Court on August 14, 2017.
judgment is proper “if the movant shows that there is
no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P.
56(a); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323
(1986); Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Winton,
818 F.3d 1103, 1105 (10th Cir. 2016). “An issue is
‘genuine' if there is sufficient evidence on each
side so that a rational trier of fact could resolve the issue
either way, ” and “[a]n issue of fact is
‘material' if under the substantive law it is
essential to the proper disposition of the claim.”
Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 144 F.3d 664, 670
(10th Cir. 1998) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202
Court's inquiry must be whether the evidence, when viewed
“through the prism of the substantive evidentiary
burden, ” Anderson, 477 U.S. at 254,
“presents a sufficient disagreement to require
submission to a jury or whether it is so one-sided that one
party must prevail as a matter of law.” Id. at
251-52. Although the Court views all facts in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party at the summary judgment
stage, “there is no issue for trial unless there is