A 2004 state law requires the names and addresses of all registered sex offenders to be made public. On Monday, the state Supreme Court ruled that the law could apply to a Bay Area man who admitted molesting a child in 1991, when sex offender registrations were confidential. Full Article
Related posts
-
CA: Assembly Approves AB 1568, potentially blocking many registrants from petitioning for registry removal
Source: ACSOL The California Assembly has voted in support of Assembly Bill (AB) 1568 on May... -
Hinda Institute’s “Navigating the System” course: Effective advocacy within the court system and behind prison walls
Source: hindahelps.com On June 3, 10, and 17, 2026 the Hinda Institute’s “Navigating the System” course... -
TX: Tough-On-Crime Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office offers sex offense plea deals
Source: texastribune.org 5/19/26 WACO — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is under fire for a plea deal his prosecutors offered...

It seems to me those practicing law should now advise their clients that taking a plea agreement in any criminal case can have future unforeseeable repercussions.
Going along the thought of Justice Kennard’s dissent, if they can change the rules and you will be subject to them, you should have the right to withdraw your plea if you don’t agree with those changes. Apparently the courts don’t see it that way. If you take a plea, you are throwing yourself at the mercy of the court and zealous lawmakers to do what they will.
Guess we’re back to needing to focus on showing aspects of registration to be punitive but even that might be moot under this absurd ruling.