Shaw v. Patton, — F.3d —-, 2016 WL 2893713 (10th Cir. May 18, 2016)

Upon moving to Oklahoma ten years after a conviction for sexual assault in Texas, the plaintiff became subject to the Oklahoma Sex Offender Registration Act, which requires regular reporting and limited the places that the plaintiff can live and be.  Applying the intent-effects test, the Tenth Circuit held that the plaintiff had not shown the “clearest of proof” of a punitive effect of the restrictions and obligations, rejecting a claim that registration constituted retroactive punishment in violation of the United States Constitution’s ex post facto clause.