Opinion ID: 1869134
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The amendment to section 566.151 was validly enacted as an emergency measure

Text: Defendant argues that the General Assembly did not enact the amendment to section 566.151 properly as an emergency measure. He points out that the default effective date was August 28, 2006, 90 days after the adjournment of the session. This date would have been after the date of his offense on August 17, 2006. In turn, he asserts that the new law violates the prohibition against ex post facto or retrospective laws regarding his actions. [5] The Missouri Constitution sets out the default effective date for enacted laws and also provides that the date may differ for emergencies: No law passed by the general assembly, except an appropriation act, shall take effect until ninety days after the adjournment of the session in either odd-numbered or even-numbered years at which it was enacted. However, in case of an emergency which must be expressed in the preamble or in the body of the act, the general assembly by a two-thirds vote of the members elected to each house, taken by yeas and nays may otherwise direct. Mo. Const. art. III, sec. 29 (emphasis added). Intending to invoke this emergency clause here, the legislature stated: Because of the need to protect Missouri citizens from sexual offenders, section A of this act is deemed necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, welfare, peace and safety, and is hereby declared to be an emergency act within the meaning of the constitution, and section A of this act shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and approval. This Court has stated that a legislative declaration stating an act to be an emergency measure is entitled to great weight, but it is not conclusive, as the courts make the final determination of whether an emergency in fact exists. Padberg v. Roos, 404 S.W.2d 161, 170 (Mo. banc 1966). In making this determination, the test is whether the factual situation is such that there is actually a crisis or emergency which requires immediate or quick legislative action for the preservation of the public peace, property, health, safety or morals. State ex rel. Tyler v. Davis, 443 S.W.2d 625, 631 (Mo. banc 1969). In its emergency clause, the legislature did not give a detailed explanation of the emergency, but it is not required to do so under the Missouri Constitution, which merely requires an emergency which must be expressed. See Mo. Const. art. III, sec. 29; Bd. of Regents for Ne. Mo. State Teachers Coll v. Palmer, 356 Mo. 946, 204 S.W.2d 291, 294-95 (1947) (addressing an argument that a bill's emergency clause was merely a conclusion and holding that the brief emergency statement was valid where it recited an immediate need for increased funding to schools after World War II in the interests of public peace, health, and safety). This may be contrasted with an emergency clause that both fails to state an emergency and contains nothing in its subject matter that suggests an emergency. See, e.g., Padberg, 404 S.W.2d at 168-69 (finding an ordinance's provision changing employees' status invalid in these circumstances). Here, consistent with Palmer , the emergency clause expresses an immediate need for protection from sexual offenders for the public health, welfare, peace, and safety. As such, this Court need determine only if an actual emergency existed, giving great weight to the legislature's initial determination. There are many reasons that would support an emergency here. The legislature may have believed that, prior to this amendment, many of those found guilty of enticement were receiving relatively light penalties, such as suspended execution of sentences or probation. Or, the legislature may have wanted to put this increased penalty in place immediately with the hope of deterring even one more instance of this dangerous crime that is becoming more prevalent with children's increased use of the Internet. In light of these justifications, this Court gives the determination of the legislature great weight and finds no reason to question it here.