ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (6/12 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule


Residency Restrictions Removed in L.A. County

Residency restrictions for most registrants residing in Los Angeles County have been removed, according to a Superior Court decision. The decision, in the form of a blanket stay of enforcement, was issued by Judge Peter Espinoza on March 18.

The stay of enforcement applies to all registrants currently on parole who are unable to find compliant housing. The decision allows the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) an opportunity to request from the court, on a case-by-case basis, an exemption “upon a showing of cause why a parolee is not entitled to a stay of enforcement’.

The decision also notes that CDCR may continue to apply residency restrictions to registrants who “have a history of sex offenses against children and who have recently been determined to be a ‘high risk offender’ from living within a half-mile of a school. The decision remains in effect until the state supreme court completes its review of the case, In Re Taylor.

“This court decision is significant in that it stops the virtual banishment of registrants from living in many parts of Los Angeles county,” stated Janice Bellucci, President of CA RSOL. “Threats by the City Council of Los Angeles to build pocket parks will no longer have the desired effect.”
There are more than 11,000 registered sex offenders in Los Angeles County, according to the California Department of Justice website. It has been reported that there are more than 100,000 registered sex offenders in the state of California.

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please do not solicit funds
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments


But we just finished building our pocket park!

– Harbor Gateway

They are small enough to put into their pockets, back pockets so it will hang down and look like they s..tted in their pants when they are walking around. Just wait for the first lawsuit against the city when a occupant gets hurt there, many people in that community need money. “Headlines; read all about it, vehicle larger than the park itself smashes into it and occupants within the park”. Parents are suing the city for an undisclosed amount of money and demanding concrete barricades be placed around the parameter of the parks and are also suggesting that that toilets be placed at the parks since it was one of the parks occupants who illegally crossed the street to use the restroom which caused the vehicle to smash into the park. Nearby residents are upset by the gang activity occurring at the parks at night and said it would be better if the parks were used for overnight stays by RSO on parole since they do not use drugs or carry guns. The attorney intends to file the lawsuit within this week.

Actually, a pocket park would be more conducive to gang meetings than family outings. I have stated before that someone was going to be assaulted or murdered in the pocket park, most probably through gang activity, before one of the registrants who ostensibly would be kicked out would commit another sex crime.

These people just saw this attempt to restrict where registered former sex offenders live just influenced the courts decision by trying to build parks to force RSO’s out. These people HAVE to understand you can’t step on on the constitutional rights of ANYONE.

I agree with you however you can only pass laws that regulate behavior.

Unfortunately, a law cannot be passed that says people have to know the constitution in order to vote or hold public office for that matter. It brings up serious hypothetical arguments, the main one being is that persons running for public office MUST pass a test on the US Constitution and how it is applied when legislating or creating public policy.

Imagine how many bottom feeding politicians would simply be out of the business of mucking up the law, and how few true qualified public servants would be left. When we talk about laws that would serve the people, one that made elected officials pass such a test would be worth gold. Then the examples they set for the constituents would be worthwhile and we’d have a better chance of having laws on the books that are derived from fear and hate mongering.

…Then the examples they set for the constituents would be worthwhile and we’d have a better chance of having laws on the books that are NOT derived from fear and hate mongering…

Indeed. I have always felt that among those activities for which a license is required, two are missing:

1) Bear children
2) Vote

I applaud Judge Peter Espinosa for stepping in and doing the right thing to prevent many people from being tossed out into the streets. His term on the CASOMB has given him a better perspective of the struggles that registrants face when they’re released from prison and are trying to reintegrate into society. Both he and assemblyman Tom Ammiano have my utmost respect for taking the research they gleaned while serving on the CASOMB and making a conscientious effort to make some crucial changes. And Always Thank You to the crew at CARSOL; It’s good for my soul to see positive things happening.


Since LA is the most populated county, this hopefully should set the standard for the state to resolve this across the board. I’m just ignorant of the process and wonder why this would have to be argued county by county or by each jurisdiction. Talk about chaos exemplified just in dealing with 83 alone. Maybe this will raise the eyebrows of the legislators to see how many years down range and how many millions of dollars and working through the muck of such an ill constructed law. Hopefully justice will prevail statewide sometime soon before more harm is done and the legislators will have the intestinal fortitude to manage this entire matter at the state level where it belongs.

What is the status of residency restrictions in Orange County now?

I don’t think anything’s changed in Orange County as far as residency restrictions, and I don’t see it changing anytime soon unless the Supreme Court steps in and declares the residency restrictions a violation of Constitutional rights across the board.

I agree with td777 for now, that is, residency restrictions in Orange County are status quo. That could change, however, depending upon the outcome of the legal challenge in the City of Cypress. We have a hearing in that case on April 10 in federal district court. In that case, we are challenging a residency restriction which precludes most registrants from living within the city limits. The city is trying to force a registrant who offended 25 years ago to move out of his fiancee’s home even though he started living there more than a year before the ordinance was passed.

How do these laws get around ex-post-facto breaches? We know the legislature claimed the release of information was not “punishment”, but since these address movement and are physical in nature, how does the court ignore these blatant violations?

I recently took a plea deal in which I now have a misdemeanor conviction of 311.11(a) possession of Child Pornography on my record. I received no jail time, was not given any list of restrictions or anything else. I was placed on 2 years of court probation (not formal probation) meaning I do not have a probation officer assigned to me. What I can’t figure out is whether or not residency restrictions will apply to me? I have been living in my house for years and it is less than 2000 feet from a school. Lastly, can anyone tell me what I might expect in terms of being a RSO? Lastly, after my two years of court probation it seems I might be able to have it expunged? Will it be possible to then get a certificate of rehabilitation and no longer have to register? Any help would be appreciated!

Most seem to end up with a felony, 3yrs formal probation, and some amount of jail time so not bad considering. In the norcal bay area many get sentenced to 6mo…which you serve 1/2 of. I had 3 underage webcam videos & ended up with a felony, 3yrs formal probation, a little over $6,0000 in fines (including probation fees), and of course the required 52-week offender program. I’m almost 1/2 way through probation. Still attending the “52-week” program that I started in Aug 2013.

Some counties/cities only enforce residency restrictions for those on parole. I called my local PD and they said they wouldn’t force me to move since I was going to be on probation. I would call your local PD and see what they say.

Being an RSO…well it’s pretty rough especially if you end up on Megan’s Law site. Some do and some don’t. Technically you are supposed to I believe…unless the CP they found was of somebody 16 or 17 years old. 15 or younger gets you on Megan’s Law. Prior to Jan 1, 2014 those convicted of possession could get their conviction expunged. AB20 (assembly bill) that went into effect 01/01/2014 put a stop to that. When I found this out I was devastated. When I took the plea deal I was planning on getting an expungement. Little did I know AB20 would come along. The only thing I can hope for at this point is being abl to have my felony reduced to a misdemeanor once I get off my 3 years of formal probation. Plan on paying for and going through what they call a 52-week offender program. Most likely…they will keep you in the program longer than 52 weeks. Why kick you loose at 52-weeks if they can keep you as long as they want basically. More $$ for them.

You can always petition to get your probation terminated early. No guarantee it will happen but might be worth a try.

MS, are you in NorCal, cause I am too, going through same thing, let’s talk.


Hang in there your family and friends need and love you. Our stories are similar I was convicted of having four pictures files on my computer of females older than sixteen, but under eighteen so i have to register for life in in NorCal, but am not on the meagan’s website.

These laws are so unfair and are nothing more than granstanding by our politcains that claim they are protecting the citizens. What they don’t take into account is that the internet and pornography is addictive and lead some down a road they never intended to go down. In my case I did not search out CP but rather stumbled upon it and downloaed four pictures files of teenagers. Yeh I thought that they might be under eighteen, but when your have an addiction to porn like I did your blind to. it We did not make or sell or trade this filth but just watched it!! does that make me some pervert I think not. I mean if I watch and download a movie with someone getting murdered does that make me a murderer? of course not. They problem is many of these websites mix up all different kinds of porn and if see it your labeled a RSO. Wait a minute I did not search this out, or buy or trade it. Why is law enforement not shutting down thses sites that put this stuff out there. imstaed of punishing people that stumble upon it. Its just wrong and shaming us for life is not the answer.

Please stay strong we love you and are not some terrible person

You can contact me if you would like to

“When I took the plea deal I was planning on getting an expungement. Little did I know AB20 would come along.”
I feel for you on that one. I was informed by my lawyer in 2000 that I could apply for an expungement in 10 years. Somewhere along the way that rug was pulled out from under me.
What is the purpose of changing the rules after the fact? It’s not a deterrent, because how were you supposed to know what punishment to expect if it changes in ten years. And why, if an offender does change his life around after the punishment imposed at the time of offense, does there need to be more doors closed that were once open to him? If he has lived a law abiding life, doesn’t that prove the laws at the time did their job?
One can argue whether one type of offender deserves relief, while another does not, but the fact is when hope that was once available is withdrawn, through no misdeeds of the former offender, the withdrawal has no purpose but to cause the offender suffering. In essence, it is legalized torture.

Hi MS, and thanks for the reply. In my case I got a misdemeanor 311.11(a) only. I’m under the impression I won’t be on the public site. Although nobody seems to know for sure. I am also in fact in NorCal. I was also not sentenced to any mandatory therapy at all. The DA literally just wanted to force me to register. No other restrictions were put into place at all. Other than 5 days of community service. That’s all.

This is certainly a step in the right direction. Thank you Janice and CARSOL for the work that you do. You are much appreciated!

When is it.Ventura countys turn? We are la Countys neighbor. How do you start this process?

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x