Sex offender challenges parole conditions

Listen to this article

A registered sex offender who has been jailed since February for violating the conditions of his parole is challenging his continued detention on the grounds that the parole conditions are unreasonably vague and unconstitutional.

Daniel Karlin, 47, was convicted in 1993 of sexually molesting several boys while working as a summer camp counselor in Yates County, and convicted of first-degree sodomy in Monroe County in 1994.

Karlin was paroled in September 2018, after 25 years in prison, with 66 conditions.

In October 2018, Karlin started a treatment program for sex offenders. In December, he started attending Monroe Community College full time and was given permission to use a laptop and the internet.

In February, two parole officers made an unannounced visit to Karlin’s home, where they inspected his computer, and discovered he had been watching the movie Nymphomania: Vol. 1 on the Netflix streaming service, and he accessed Q magazine through the Libby public library app.

The parole officers determined the movie and the magazine amounted to a violation of Karlin’s parole conditions. Specifically, he was charged with: accessing materials depicting sexual activity; using the internet to access pornographic materials; accessing materials depicting sexual nudity; and failing to complete sex offender treatment.

Karlin claims he has not completed sex-offender treatment only because he was arrested and has been incarcerated since Feb. 19.

Karlin’s lawyer, Teodoro Xavier Siguenza, filed a 16-page writ of habeas corpus on Tuesday claiming the parole conditions prohibiting his client from possessing or accessing pornographic materials, sexual nudity and sexual activity are “unconstitutionally vague” and not related to his rehabilitation.

Netflix has a policy of not showing pornography, according to the petition. He noted that several reviewers noted that the film is “non-pornographic,” and mainstream websites consider the movie “arthouse and international,” but not “adult,” or “pornographic.”

Q is a British monthly music magazine. The parole officers charged Karlin with violating his parole because the magazine he accessed contained an image of several nude young man with their backs to the camera.

“There is nothing sexual about the image. The individuals are standing with their backs turned to the camera. Their genitals are not exposed and they are not engaged in sexual activity,” according to the petition.

In the petition, Karlin claims the rules he is accused of violating “are so broad that a vast swath of protected material would be prohibited,” including Oscar-winning movies, popular television shows, numerous magazines, novels and art works.

“In fact, the rule may prohibit petitioner from reading court opinions or performing research about the very crimes he was convicted of,” according to the petition.

“Read literally, just turning on a television, opening a magazine, or even going outside in public could result in a violation of this condition, given the abundance of potentially sexually-oriented advertising that is prevalent in modern society,” the filing states.

In addition, Karlin argued in court papers that the conditions “are not rationally related” to the types of offenses he committed.

Karlin was convicted of sex offenses with minors, but he has no history or possessing or accessing illegal pornography and he has no record of assaulting adults, according to the petition.

[email protected] (585) 232-2035