Koch v. Village of Hartland

Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendant-Village’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-convicted sex offender’s section 1983 action, alleging that defendant’s Ordinance, which precluded any person, who had been convicted of sexually violent offense, from moving into Village after September 24. 2018 until certain conditions had been met, violated Ex Post Facto Clause. While Dist Ct., in applying existing Seventh Circuit precedent, found that Ordinance operated only prospectively because it only limited convicted sex offender's current, post-Ordinance enactment date's desire to move into Village, Ct. of Appeals, in overruling Seventh Circuit precedent, found that Ordinance was potentially violative of Ex Post Facto Clause because it was retroactive in sense that Ordinance attached new consequences to events (i.e., plaintiff’s conviction on sex offenses) that were completed prior to Ordinance’s enactment. Remand was required for determination as to whether Ordinance was “punitive” for purposes of application of Ex Post Facto Clause.