The California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) decided at its meeting on November 20 to support a draft tiered registry bill that includes the termination of registration requirements for some registered citizens after 10, 20 and 30 years of their conviction while continuing lifetime registration for others. The text of the draft bill has not yet been released to the public but its contents were discussed during the CASOMB meeting.
According to discussions at the meeting, the bill would designate registered citizens as Tier 1 (10 year), Tier 2 (20 year) and Tier 3 (lifetime) based upon factors including original offense and whether there was a re-offense. Tier 1 registrants would include those convicted of a misdemeanor offense while Tier 2 registrants would include those convicted of some felony offenses. Tiered 3 registrants would include those convicted of one or more serious, violent felonies. The bill would also terminate registration requirements for those who were convicted more than 30 years ago, have not reoffended and have registered for at least 10 years.
“CASOMB has taken an important step toward creation of a tiered registry in California,” stated CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “There are many more steps to be taken, including introduction of the bill in early 2015.”
There are currently 102,021 registered citizens in California today, according to the California Department of Justice (DOJ). Of that total, 74,132 are “in community” and the remainder are incarcerated. Also of that total, there are 6,692 homeless registered citizens who are listed as “transients”.
The total number of registered citizens includes about 18,600 people who were convicted prior to 1997 and have not committed a subsequent sex offense. If the bill is passed, most of these individuals would be removed from the registry by the California DOJ. Those who would not be removed include anyone designated as a sexually violent predator.
“There is something for everyone to love and something for everyone to hate in this bill,” stated CASOMB board member Janet Neeley. Other board members quipped that it must therefore be a good bill.
CASOMB designated Neeley as the board’s point person on the bill as it makes it way to and through the state legislature.
USA, not fight this…help revise this with facts so it reworked as we all know it should. I am not opposed to relief for some, but we have a golden opportunity to help them craft something we can all be proud of, based on facts.
Support it but lets help try and influence it to our states best interests.
Let’s discuss the elephant in the room, every registrant who posts here and everyone who doesn’t post or even know about CARSOL and every person ever convicted of a crime should understand that the outcome is a result of failed negotiations. We can throw the word justice around all we want, but really it comes down to the involved parties failing to resolve their differences/problems with each other in a more diplomatic manner. Prison time, fines, restitution, community service, counseling or therapy, parole, probation, supervised release, and registration are not solutions but bandaid’s on a wound which probably needs major surgery, but nobody yet knows how to perform the operation or let alone what the operation might be.
As much as a tiered registry could be better than the status quo, both originate from the same flawed system. Most openly admit the tools, programs, and services in place aren’t doing what they were intended to with any level of efficiency. Perhaps its time to start asking different questions with alternative end games in mind because new things happen daily, yet most of the focus is on the backend with the mindset of “oops it occurred again we are passed off let’s go catch the criminal”.
Please take a moment to read the paper from April by the csomb. It is pretty clear that tier 3 are repeat sex offenders, kidnappers.
At one time there were 4 men that were banished from society and they had no food and were starving to death. Than one man said, “If we say here we will die and if, we go to the enemy’s camp we may die”, the 4 men got up and went to the enemy’s camp. Not only they end-up living, the enemy was defeated.
Today, I sent emails to the assembly person and the senators that represent the district I live in. All these people are Republicans and do not like SO’s. In the email I shared my personal, horror story with the SOR. I gave them some facts and shared how the SOR is more about harassing and destroying RC and their families and less about protecting the targeted subjects. It has nothing to do with justice. I ended my email with a challenge to facts, efficiencies and justice for all. Ladies and gentlemen I made a step toward the enemy’s camp
What defines violent, technically every sexual assault is violent?
The fallacy of categorizing by charge, is consider the same charge for two different scenarios. If someone pleads to a penetration charge for probation vs. someone who is assigned a prison number, goes to state prison and is a parolee — the state cant treat a probationee the same as a parolee with a state number. Thats crazy… I agree light at the end of the tunnel. But probation plea deal should have the opportunity to get off the list. They are such a low threat, they didnt even go to prison, never had GPS and successfully completed probation. Yet this law would be considered tier 3 if it involves penetration, even if the facts of the case do not conclude any forced penetration – just a plea bargain that avoided prison time.
Re: risk based vs. offense based… Someone may have committed something serious or categorized as a “violent” offense 20 or 30 years ago and has no subsequent offenses or run-ins with the law, poses no threat and yet may not be offered any relief under a tiered system if it is based on offense, so in reality this is about continued punishment rather than prioritizing risk. On the same token, someone may have committed a relatively minor offense yet pose a significant threat of re-offending or committing a more serious offense because they haven’t dealt with whatever issues, deviancies or demons that haunt them. If we are going to advocate reform yet cannot abolish the registry outright, then we should be advocating for a system that is more realistic and relevant to what it is “supposed” to do. An appropriate yardstick is needed that can be consistently applied to all. If this isn’t done right, this can do more harm than good. There is a long uphill battle to this. CASOMB may be in support but it still has to go through the legislative process and it has died in committee before. If by some miracle it does land on the Governor’s desk and gets chaptered, if it is based on offense rather than risk, then it may be nothing more than a pyrrhic victory for many.
I have been listening to the conversation going on in here concerning the tiers bill,in my case I’m a 288a
theres a very good chance that I would be lumped in with the violent predators.Even if the offense took place 32 years ago,and I don’t even have any offense of any kind on my record except the original charge.And as other people have pointed out, it used to be a nonviolent crime(288a),in my case,that was told to me by the attorney,so this changed,by these dirty crooked politicians.It would seem to me that I could fight this classification,putting me in the category of murders,rapists,and other violent people is insane.I will wait until Janice gives her opinion about the completed bill,if it effects me in a very negative way,I don’t support it.It would cause me and others(288a),(288b) people, incredible suffering,cause the cops to harass us a lot more,force us to register more often,it takes an average of 4 hours to register
here in Sacramento.Once this is in place its next to impossible to change
without a great deal of money.I have confidence in Janice looking at all these issues,And I will wait until she talks about this bill in more detail and addresses
these concerns.
As I’ve mentioned before, remain positive and the registry isn’t going away! If you review similar tiered registries, most minor or misdemeanor convictions fall off after 10 years. Then, most felonies fall off after 20 years and very serious or repeat offenders fall off after 30 years. My only clarification would be, what if your conviction was reduced to a misdemeanor by 17b? By law, you have never been convicted of a felony?
I would like to apologize to Janice and her whole team. I know you are working hard on this for very little thanks. For that I do thank you. I think what everyone is upset about is we were hoping on a risk based outcome. That way we all have that chance. I think what would be fair for everyone if it is going to be offence base is ,write into the bill that judges can make a lower tier decision for higher tier based on risk level.
Where do I show up? and when , And when do I stand up , and when do I sit down and shut up!
Yes, I know Steve, and if you read the report they put out it clearly shows what they classify as violent.
Three Lifetime
Sexually Violent Predators; kidnappers;
offenders with repeat violent sex
offenses; high-risk** sex offenders
Two 20 years
“Serious” or “Violent” * felony sex
offenders who are not high-risk* sex
offenders
One 10 years
Non “Serious” and non “Violent” sex
offenders; all misdemeanor sex
offenders
They just defined the tiers clearly a few months ago, now they are using what they did there to plug into the tiered bill. They did not discuss static 99 in that report. High Risk, Repeat Offenders, Kidnappers will not come off.
I think this is a step closer at least other guys will be off even though I might not be off.
Let us all just think good thoughts and live our lives well. The best thing we can do.
Anyone wishing to contact you California state representative about a tiered registry click below:
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/contests/district/state-assembly/
One more thing occurred to me. We need to make sure the language around penal code section 290 clearly states that if you are no longer required to register, then you are no longer considered a person subject to 290 requirements. This may sound strange, but imagine we are no longer required to register but can be subject to some other requirements of 290.
Would this teiring also relate to a COR if you were released after your request. Essentialy removing you off any employment related problems. Seems logical for it to.
I don’t understand why this all has to be so complicated. For a misdemeanor (level 1) sex offense, lengthen the requirement to obtain a 1203.4 to five years after release of probation. This is a process in which a judge decides if you have your charge dismissed and can be (usually is) argued in court by a District Attorney. If the charge is dismissed, then the person should not need to register. Also for felony convictions (level 2) there is already of Certificate of Rehabilitation in place; leave that as is. The people not eligible for either above due to the heinous nature of their crime should register for life unless they get a Government Pardon.
Hi Janis,
My husband was convicted of attempted 288(a) &
& 288.2 b (internet sting) his case was recently dismissed (expunged) but he is still required to register. How will the tier system affect him?
Het jgarcia how did your husband get his case expunged or dismissed? I have the same charges and would like to know more about his case. Like are you in CA how long ago was he convicted and what he had to do to get his case dismissed. Any info you have would be great. Thanks
Mike,
Because he was charged with “attempted” he was eligible under people v marinelli. Recordgone achieved this for him,the key is making sure it was attempted. He was convicted in California, about 10 years ago. I would suggest calling them and explaining your situation. Good luck!
Thanks jgarcia yes my charges were the same except they added a 647.6 charge which is a misdemeanor. So did that remove him from public disclosure or do anything at all to help his situation. Also did it cost him a lot of money which I don’t really have. Once again thanks for your response.
Yeah I read the merinelli case and it appears I would not qualify since I was convicted of an actual 288.2 b and the 647.6 both charges the DA added when I wouldn’t take their plea deal and I ended up with prison time unsteady of the 8 months of alternative sentence I would’ve got if ide taken tgeir deal. Anyways thanks ill call them anyways see what they say.
I’m not exactly sure of the legalities and such regarding a record clearance in California (PC1203.4). I do know that in my case, I had my record cleared because it is mandatory that they do so. Please read the requirements carefully because it could be the case for many registered citizens.
I had two charges, a 664.288(a) and 664.288.2(b), the typical internet sting charges. I received 5 yrs probation, and two felony counts. The 2(b) is a wobbler so it can be reduced to a misdemeanor, while the other charge cannot be reduced, or so I’m told. I have questions though, but they are logical ones, so in law, logic doesn’t always apply.
Marinelli and Lewis both state that a 664 or attempt is a separate and distinct crime than any completed crime, therefore the punishment is different. My sentence was probation, 5 yrs, which is typically a misdemeanor sentence. My PD said that the 664.288(a) cannot be reduced because there is no corresponding misdemeanor to reduce it to. So, it would have been a misdemeanor if I had actual intercourse…go figure!
Anyone know of a person that has had a 664.288(a) reduced? My next step is to petition for relief from internet disclosure, then file a COR in my home county. Any comments and suggestions are appreciated.
I say that we support this..
Why ?
Once we have a tiered level which is much better than life time.
In 5 years, it will be easier to remove Megan’s Law. All of it.
If we do not support this, then how are we gotta remove the Megan’s Law?
Joe,
Just some points of clarification and appreciation for your response to my comments/questions. I know that record clearance and felony reduction are totally different. I’m trying a step by step approach in my long process. Already accomplished record clearance; next is felony reduction; petition for removal from internet disclosure and finally, filing a COR. Also, my comment about intercourse with a minor needs clarification; definitely over the age of 14, not under, and generally speaking, over 16 seems to be a common “breaking” point. Cases of statutory rape seem have lesser punishment than the attempted internet type crimes, but again, correct me if I’m wrong.
I’m weighing heavily on the Marinelli and Lewis cases regarding the glaring differences between attempts and completed crimes. Perhaps a long shot, but a shot worth taking for me.
Can’t really call it comparing apples and oranges, because for most RSO’s the outcome is identical; lifetime registration. Maybe the tiered system will address that outcome, but if an attempted 288(a) is considered a violent felony under the tiered system, then that too becomes a flawed system, leaving no relief for those who never had a victim, those who never touched anybody or those, like the thousands of others on the registry, made a terrible choice. Let’s see if we can break some new ground!