ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: September 21 – Phone meeting details

Emotional Support Group Meetings (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

California

New Legislation signed by Gov. Brown (“Ban-the-box” / Cert. of Rehabilitation) UPDATED

Several pieces of new legislation were signed into law by Governor Brown earlier this month that might of interest here. Among them are a prohibition of asking for information about criminal records on employment applications (“ban the box”), as well as a possible discretionary shortening of the waiting period for a Certificate of Rehabilitation if the “interest of justice is being served”. Full Article / More Info

NOTE: 290 Registrants are excluded from a discretionary shortening of the waiting period for a Certificate of Rehabilitation. (added by Admin 10/28)

4852.22.  Except in a case requiring registration pursuant to Section 290, a trial court hearing an application for a certificate of rehabilitation before the applicable period of rehabilitation has elapsed may grant the application if the court, in its discretion, believes relief serves the interests of justice.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0501-0550/sb_530_bill_20130909_enrolled.html

 

Join the discussion

  1. Justice for ALL

    Janice, I am unclear about this:

    “Penal Code 4852.22 will now permit a trial court to grant an application for a Certificate before the seven-year waiting period has expired if the court, in its discretion, has determined that the interests of justice are served.”

    Does this mean that one would have to go to court first to get the determination that justice has been served? I don’t even want to think of the cost for that seeing as I have yet to be employed for over three years.

    Thanks in advance for your time Janice.

  2. Ron

    Please interpret this ruling for us in CA.

    • Janice Bellucci

      Unfortunately, SB 530 created an exception for anyone required to register pursuant to PC 290 to the shortening of time to obtain a certificate of rehabilitation. Therefore, this bill will not help registered citizens.

      • Staying Positive

        Janice, is there the possibility of filing suit to remove the exception from the new legislation? Maybe it violates the Equal Protection doctrine?

  3. Anonymous Nobody

    So let’s get this straight, this law says the court can do that “in the interest of justice.” However, even if it is IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, the law says justice does not matter for registrants, registrants are not due any justice?! How can a law that specifically says that justice does not matter stand?!

    Surely, when they blundered into that language, they crossed a legal line, whether outright constitutional or just a legal doctrine. I just can’t see how it can be constitutional to have a law that specifically says certain offenders (actually, FORMER offenders) may not have justice.

    This attitude that registrants are not due any justice is nothing new, we have all been suffering dearly under it for a long time now; but until now, they have always been very careful about their language they could deny justice without ever saying so or acknowledging it. This law blatantly says registrants are not due justice. This is a first.

    That language can be challenged. And it can also be exploited to scream about and point to whenever alleging unfair treatment of registrants — to undermine any assertion to the contrary. It could even be used to bolster arguments that other laws against registrants have a similar foundation of denying justice.

    • BillG (yet again)

      Sorry to be a little late here, but:
      Yes, that is exactly what is going-on here.

      You need to understand something. They use us as a ‘hate-magnet’.
      Registered Citizens are branded forever. They will carve “SEX OFFENDER” on your tombstone and prohibit your grandchildren from visiting your grave.

      The Popular Culture hates with vengeance forever and takes active delight in hating. It’s an experiment in crime control. The more publicity they generate around their active hating, the more sexual assault will be driven out of the public conscience, hammered back into the darkness, feared, loathed and denied. Once the toothpaste is back in the tube, they can go back to hating racial minorities and gay people.

      But since they can’t manufacture hatred for anyone else anymore, it’s folk like you and me who get the treatment. they learned long ago that otherwise gentle people will go berserk where even the least tangible hint of child sexuality is concerned. So here’s the perfect horse to ride and look at what you gain as a politico: You can whip people into a paranoid frenzy; further endanger potential victims by encouraging potential offenders to hide themselves away from help; portray yourself as a defender of the helpless; promote violence while justifying vigilante activism and mob rule; encourage murder by lackluster prosecution of the base animals who attack Registered Citizens…need I go on?

      There’s more grist for this mill than there is room on the internet.
      And It Won’t End, because EVERYONE is a “Sex Offender” to someone. Every mature man and woman has, at some time, committed some form of sexual assault no matter how mild.. call it a seduction, call it romancing, call it “chemistry”…
      Now if only they can expand actionable definition and terrorize everyone, we will continue to let the gates of hell run amok.

      And we will.

  4. USA

    Well, no offense, but I was convicted or plead to a wobbler (not child related) about 18 years ago and I received SUMMARY PROBATION! I walked into the OC Courts and was literally shocked. OC doesn’t (it took place in LA) play fair. LIterally after 5 different court dates, the judge went through everything and stated that he couldn’t find one reason to deny the motion, but it just wasn’t enough? I had a clean record, obtained a graduate degree, married/children and ect ect. Its very difficult to obtain a Certificate of Rehab. Had the Judge granted my motion, I would be free from the Registration.

  5. Tim

    It’s a show. See, we are providing a way out for some people. Looks like my conviction excludes me out completely from a COR. Even though you look at my crime compared to all sex crimes and factor in my age and education, looks like my chances of commuting a sex crime are near the general population. And they are shortening the waiting period for other crimes which have a much higher recidivism rate. Is the captain at the helm here or is the ship now run by a bunch of drunk yahoos from steerage.

  6. Staying Positive

    I have post-morten question: Did CARSOL know about SB 530 in advance and try to lobby to have the PC 290 exception language removed? Or did this bill sneak up on everyone?

    • Joe

      I am guessing that CA RSOL is picking its battles where they may make a difference in the real world. It is difficult enough to get a COR after 20 or 30 years. Good luck trying after the minimum 10 years, and fat chance with anything less than that. Law and interest of justice or not.

      I would agree with @AnonymousNobody above in that that sort of thing only adds to the obviously punitive character of the registry and is yet another straw that will eventually break the camel’s back. Unfortunately the camel has the strength of Hercules.

      On another note, nothing stops a private citizen from speaking up against proposed bills in Sacramento. The hearings in the Capitol are open to the public…

Leave a Reply

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 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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

.