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
-
Halloween rules target sex offenders. Do they protect kids? [Interview with Janice]
Source: usatoday.com 10/29/2026 By N’dea Yancey-Bragg As Halloween approaches, law enforcement agencies across the country are... -
Webinar Nov 2: Working With Reality – Employment After Conviction
Source: Restorative Action Alliance Join the Restorative Action Alliance for an interactive, informative webinar designed to... -
CA: Fresno Council Orders Sex Offender Housing Limits. Will They Roam Streets Instead?
Source: gvwire.com 10/23/26 The Fresno City Council directed the creation of an ordinance to restrict housing...

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.