ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021

ACSOLCalifornia

Consideration of Tiered Registry Bill Delayed (SB 421)

Senator Scott Wiener, author of the Tiered Registry Bill (SB 421), has waived presentation regarding that bill on May 15, the original date on which the Senate Appropriations Committee was scheduled to consider the bill. Due to this waiver, SB 421 will be placed in the committee’s Suspense File and will not be considered until May 25.

According to staff in the office of Sen. Wiener, there is uncertainty regarding the estimate cost of implementing the Tiered Registry Bill. The estimated cost is expected to be revealed in a Budget Committee analysis which has not yet been completed.

“A tiered registry will save taxpayer dollars as well as increase the safety of taxpayers’ lives,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “It is our hope that the Appropriations Committee will consider future savings — of dollars and lives — when it reviews the Tiered Registry Bill.”

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.  
 
87 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Maybe there are people behind the scenes that want to keep that cost high because it’s job security for them.

unless… it’s the cost for running the courts to get registrants off the registry. There’s that.

I am curtain that there will be a filing fees for petition, and that fees pays for court cost.

This cost issue is simply a different angle on one point I have made about why this bill is a terror to us, not a hope. This cost is for building a big lobby to fight us tooth and nail going forward and that will guarantee that registration will never be able to be eliminated or even significantly reduced. Too many people’s careers will be dependent on it once we build this big lobby, which they expect to take them a year of effort just to do all the hiring and get things off the ground. It will be like… Read more »

This bill is very different than a COR. With a COR you have to prove eligibility. This bill gives you the right to end registration unless the DA can prove you’re a threat.

That’s pretty much the same as COR. Both the tiered bill and COR require you to wait X period of time and then petition the court with proof that you’ve meet all the requirements.

The main difference between the two is that with COR you need to have your record expunged first, which is nearly impossible to do if you did prison time. The tiered bill doesn’t care about that.

You do not need to have your record expunged for a COR, although that certainly would only help your case. In fact, in past decades, the case was that you could not even apply for a COR if you already had an expungement, as the expungement did all and more than the COR. The expungement was sometimes called “statutory rehabilitation.”

I had a feeling something like this was coming…

And the cost as well as danger of spreading police resources to monitor tens of thousands of people who present no danger to the public? Where is that immediate consideration?

Is this good news or bad news ??

You gotta assume, being The special people that we are, almost everything is bad news. :/ just saying

It will also put thousands back to work by lifting the burden of the registry and letting them be able to get real jobs! It will also ease the burden of thousands having to register, saving the State untold man hours in registration and admin hours.

So now it’s on the suspense file, so what if no one picks it up? so what if theres no author to present the bill?? does it move forward? is it on hold until further notification?

It’s not in the suspense file and there in no indication that Senator Wiener has divorced himself from this bill. [Appropriation Committee Rules: All bills with a fiscal impact in any fiscal year of $150,000 or more (any source fund) will, by a majority of members present and voting, a quorum being present, move to the Suspense File. “Fiscal impact” includes all fund sources. In addition, any bill in which the primary purpose is to create a task force, commission, work group, a report or a study, will move to the Suspense File. ] That it has been delayed for… Read more »

Nondescript, good points. It is ok to bring up issues and things we don’t like. But there are some of us who refuse to support the tiered bill even when ACSOL officially supports it, and troll this website with nonstop negativity. To those people: I hope that you can see the big picture, which is that first priority is to get some kind of tiered registry–like almost all other states. Until then, very few get off the registry. It would be idealistic, magical thinking were I to refuse to support a bill and insist on waiting for a perfect, just… Read more »

It’s as if they’re saying, “WHOOPS, we started this wildfire. Now, do we have enough money to put it out, or should we just spend money to keep it burning.”

Morons!!!

I guess I will stand alone in terms of optimism. Janice and so many others have put their collective time, energy and reputation on the line for us all, rather deserved or not. This bill is as important to me as the rest of you, but I will not concede to defeat. People, we must be realistic, to the public and many lawmakers, this is not a popular bill; certainly you should anticipate a few snags. What ever comes easy? In the meantime lets pick up the phone and make calls, lets write to those that has influence. One way… Read more »

I am going to join, you deegoh, in the spirit of optimism. This bill is not a popular bill among curtain company, however, this could be a maneuver to keep it out of their hysterical public, knowing and give it a real chance of passing. If they are taking their time to crunch real good numbers, showing real savings the Appropriations Committee can defend its passing on this reason, alone. Also, May 25 will put the bill at the end their sessions and separate from SB26.

Well said, lawyers know that timing is important. If the knew some aspect of it was rushed or something wasn’t solid it could fail. So better to polish it, be sure, before going forward.

@deegoh
Though not a resident of the Golden State, I am in complete agreement with you. Optimism–hope–is sometimes all we have. Any improvement, even incrementally, is still a shift in the right direction. It’s long been said that perfect is the enemy of good. IOW, don’t throw away progress in pursuit of perfection.

Like you, I have been praying for judicial wisdom and legal changes in our favor…and will continue to do so. God’s plan will become apparent someday, and I think He’s already giving us peeks into it!

–AJ

Good Attitude deegoh and Harry…

This isn’t about money. it’s about politics. Anybody who sponsors this bill, or supports it in a vote, becomes an easy target for campaign ads. Can you imagine the campaign commercials from their opponents on the next go-around? This is why I continue to believe our only realistic chance at change is at the court level, not the legislative level. Politicians care about keeping their jobs just as much, or more, than any of the rest of us. They know they are taking a risk by supporting anything that appears to make them sympathetic to the lepers of our time.

Matt,

This bill has a lot of political cover to protect any politician’s assets when voting in favor of the bill. It has support from LE and DA’s, it had the support of LGBT and victim advocate group. Any politician can stand behind those groups to save their political career.

I’ve been to the capital many times, and when this bill was introduced in previous years, many politicians said they could not vote in favor of the bill unless it had backing by LE and even victim advocate group.

The law enforcement/victim advocate cabal is beginning to see the precious investment in scare politics blooms like a Ponzy scheme, now threatening to bankrupt society morally and economically, and the public panic is already beyond their control, subverting law and order, producing homelessness and desperation and creating victims by registering children and breaking up families, diverting money from fighting crime to nannying registrants. So they need to whack down what they had sown. But the wretched moral panic has already bolted to seed and fear of sex offenders will continue to be propogated by the media. That is the dirt… Read more »

It’s possible that the author is getting cold feet. He was getting some extremely negative feedback. It couldn’t hurt to call or write his office and express your support:

Sen. Scott Wiener
State Capitol, room 4066
Sacramento, CA
95814-4900
916-651-4011

Hi I am Jesse and accepted a plea in 1999 I was told I would get probation but it did not go the way it was supposed to, (We all know how manipulative the law and government is and how they use all things positive and negative to there advantage.) Suffice it to say after being lied to and serving time I was about to be paroled when finally they told me I can appeal it but if I did I may have to start all over again. Well I got out on parole completed my parole with no problem.… Read more »

I myself am planning on changing my last name once I’m able to get off the registry for the reason you named. It’s not the official sources that are the problem, but all those 3rd party websites that grab this information and let it live forever. I figure if I have a different name, than anyone trying to simply Google me won’t comeback with negative results form those sites.

That would be good accept that changing of the name does not help when you have the same social security number which is needed for both jobs and housing.

Right. So a proper background check will reveal all the appropriate legal status but it Google search will not. That’s all I’m worried about. I don’t need people simply Googling my name and having it come up with those 3rd party websites.

That makes sense but I have not changed my name and i just did a google search for my self and no matter how I typed my name nothing came up. I think it stays on for a while then just disappears as google places others there. I don’t know.?

@Jesse: Only answer if you feel comfortable: I am in virtually the exact situation as you. My plea was from 1999. It was to the L&L 14/15, and it is a misdemeanor. It’s the only thing on my record. I’m wondering why you don’t have to register in OK? Is is because it was from 1999 or because it was a misdemeanor? I’m asking because I’m wondering if I were to move to OK, would I also be exempt from registering? Is there an advocacy group there I can contact to find out more? You’ve peaked my curiosity. I’m asking… Read more »

Oklahoma law is that you only have to register for 10 yrs here . Maybey it is 10 years off of parole but mine was is feb of 1999 and I think it has to do with the specific laws in this state. So I do not know what else to say like the law number or anything but it is as I say.

We need to have faith that this bill is eventually going to pass! We all know that this is a taboo subject and affects all politicians and courts- someone mentioned that change would have to come from the court level. DA and judges in the courts are also elected and also subjected to political backlash from the public during elections.
We just have to keep SHOWING UP and WRITING and CALLING! This will PASS

To be perfectly honest, I truly believe that even if the bill made it all the way to the governor’s desk, that he would veto it!
Not trying to be negative , just realistic

Of all the Governors CA has had, Jerry Brown is the only one I think that would sign this bill. Plus, after 4 terms now, he won’t be running for Governor again, so he won’t have any political consequences by signing this. He is our best bet.

I personally think the bill will pass! The Governor of Ca is rather liberal. It’s a no brainer. Plus, it’s a pretty fair bill . Let’s remain positive! The big issue will be the courts. Having to go to court to get off the Registry will overburden the courts. The bill should just allow you to fall off if you meet the parameters! Otherwise, unless the DA can say you have been re arrrsted numerous times etc, it’s a no brainer!

Is anyone really surprised…I mean, really? Be honest…sure it’s nice to think something good could happen but fantasy is all that is.

Why would you possibly think that something could really happen to allow you to have your life back…nonsense.

The government owns you and it is FOR LIFE.

Sorry to be a downer, but this bill or any bill or court case is not going to save you. It’s too big now. You have to drop out go somewhere nicer if you can or make fighting this stuff your life.
I’m torn between hiding under a rock and fighting with anything I can throw, all the while dreaming of relocating to a country that doesn’t hate me and I can forget all this.
Thing is, no oppressed group was ever saved, save by their own hands through sacrifice. That’s a hard lesson, but true.

This bill if it becomes law will safe the state tens or hundreds of millions in the long run. They must see that.

Guys, I understand the cynicism about this bill, but remember that Janice – who is a lawyer with a law degree and everything – has said that this bill would help many if not most registrants. So while venting on this site should be encouraged, let’s leave the analysis of the bill – and predictions of its effectiveness – to the legal professionals, shall we?

What’s the point of the comments section then if not to give us the opportunity to read one another’s input? Personally, I’ve learned a lot from reading the observations of others in the bill’s text that doesn’t require one to have a law degree, but simply a proficient mastery of the English language. While SB 421 is definitely imperfect and lots of it doesn’t make sense, I am just hoping the end result will be good (even though after reading the bill many times, I do think tiered registry, as it’s written, has the potential to complicate matters for many… Read more »

As I said in my post, input is great, but I’m asking us all to leave the technical legal opinions to Janice. Such as which of us certain bills and laws will hurt or help. I leave that to legal professionals, as should we all.

Who do you think you are? I say we continue to express our thoughts freely.

Seriously? I left my fate to a “legal professional” over 20 years ago and that action is what got me in this situation to begin with! Never never never fail to get a second opinion. I did and I am paying with my life.

While it will ultimately come down to lawyers representing us we certainly can and should be sharing information and yes, frustrations and musings on this topic that we (unfortunately) know so intimately.

Actually, Janice wants the tiers to use empirical evidence. This tier of 10 year, 20 years, and lifetime runs contrary to what Janice believes in. Dr. Hanson’s work suggests that 17 year is the max for any registrant. This an expert in his field. So if the max if 17 years, then the corresponding tiers would have fewer years to be on the registry. If the tiers followed what Janice wants for years, which is based upon empirical evidence, then it would look like this: First, define what a lifetime term is. I’ll just say it’s a hundred years. Lifetime… Read more »

I like you tiers — IF they are automatic, not some BS court hearing to maybe deny you. IF they are an entitlement, like 1203.4 is, which by court ruling is an entitlement. Whatever the number of years for your tier, it ends then, not maybe, but absolutely. As I keep saying, this bill is a prosecutor’s dream bill — and we could not be more wrong than to endorse it as we have, especially how strongly we have endorsed it and lobbied for it. We are not going to get anything better because we won’t fight for that, we… Read more »

There are a lot of loop holes in the bill 1 is that after eligible you must have a Cert of rehabilitation, I ask you do any of you have one of these? They say a lot of people will be taken off this is true however the ones that will be taken off easily are the one who had indecent exposure like peeing on a bar wall or the statutory rapes but any type of serious offenses I have a hard time believing that will happen easily even with as great of a lawyer as we have fighting for… Read more »

You know, I understand this site is for everyone because “We are all in this together” but it gets really old when there are those of us who face our crisis with hope and faith and courage and a willingness to keep trying, versus those who constantly spew negativity and pessimism. I have 25 years of this crap but I decided a long time ago that I would rather die trying to address the problem and try and fix it rather than give up and complain. Thanks to Janice and company, we all have this site to voice our concerns… Read more »

Mark, I think you’re censoring a part of this community – which is being negative. While there are some negative feelings, it’s important to understand there are several, different viewpoints. I see this site as a think tank. While there are somethings you might not agree with a person, there could be something within that opposing view that may be pertinent to something else related. For many of us, this is the first step to being helpful. For some of us, this is the only way we can be helpful is by being a part of this community. Me, I’m… Read more »

I completely agree with you, Mark.

Heck, if ASCOL didn’t want to hear the thoughts and emotions of all the people they represent, they could just censor out the ones they didn’t like. I assume they value a diversity of mood and opinion, because a lot of different viewpoints make it onto this screen.

I agree Mark. Life is not worth living without hope. I come here to find hope, not to get depressed from all the negative opinions some people make here repeatedly. Negative opinions rarely help any situation in life.

I’ve learned which names/handles on here to skim, and which to hold in esteem. 😉

But…I agree, and am going to click that button over to the right (——>>) to support the cause, even as a non-CA resident. Whether or not you’re in CA, this site, these attorneys, are helping to shift attitudes and laws. We gotta keep the pressure applied.

I’m sure even $0.50 or $1.00 can be useful. Little bits mean a lot.

–AJ

It is not that we do not hope for the best believe we do but to live our lives with a set of rose colored glasses is not going to make it easier but instead make it crueler to live with if it does not happen. Well I am not an atheist but I will tell you that after 20 years of prayers it is not easy to have your faith. Crazy is when you do the same thing over and over and expect that something will change so after 20 years of prayer with no results just it getting… Read more »

This bill sucks. Some things that concern me: 1. If the DA objects, then the decision to whether we are granted relief relies on an elected politician (judge). 2. Other concerns are the inclusion of possibly being required to complete a CASOMB-treatment program; 3. SARATSO / Static 99 scoring; 4. tiers (10 yr, 20 yr, lifetime) are completely inconsistent to empirical evidence. The fact that we would need to petition is like adding salt to the wound. IF DA objects, then we have to pay out-of-pocket for psychological assessment and attorney’s fees (as I can never see myself going against… Read more »

Joe P.

So you would rather stay on for life just because the DA “could object” to your petition. This is the deal they are offering. The petition process was put in there so politicians would support this Bill and would not get totally blamed if someone later reoffends. We will still be able to support additional reforms and a challenge to the registry in it’s entirety.

Is there a minimum number of times the DA and judge can refuse your petition? If no, then it might as well be lifetime registration.

Remember, public safety is so vague when it comes to sex offenders. Since the truth about public safety has been proved to be based upon a false research from a non-expert, we can safely say that public safety isn’t supported by empirical evidence, but fear.

No government wants to believe in empirical evidence b/c it would ruin the current system. This current tiered proposal isn’t based upon empirical evidence. Well, Michigan does.

Lake County You are twisting my words. I never said that I would rather “stay on for life just because the DA could object” to my petition. I disagree with this bill for many reasons, as stated above. This bill sucks because it has the potential to put us registrants in worse position. I don’t know about you; but if the DA objects (I’m sure they will in many cases), I don’t have at least $4,000 to $6,000 to throw away at attorney’s fees for a chance to get off the registry. If my petition is rejected, then I pretty… Read more »

Joe P. I am as poor as anyone else here. I haven’t had a job in almost 20 years since conviction. I struggle every day to pay my utilities and feed myself. My car barely works, but when it does, I have no gas money to go anywhere. I cannot come up with $4,000 or anything close to that to hire an attorney. But I at least want this chance to get off the registry. This is likely my quickest way out, short of waiting for the registry to end completely. I don’t think my petition will be denied, but… Read more »

They are not offering us this deal we are fighting for A DEAL do not think for one minute they are giving us something . I understand hope and the want to have faith and I am in no way bashing that . However please do not live under a rock and say our negative opinions don’t matter we have been fighting the same thing for 20 years and where it is now is what we have or have not achieved. Do you think because you just got out or because we have a great lawyer that all that is… Read more »

IF DA objects, minimum costs could be $4,000 to $6,000. So this bill lines the pockets of lawyers with cash.

Yes Joe that is what it does but every law that is written has the same out come, someone makes money and someone has to pay, Our government and corrupt lawmakers will always make sure they make money off the slaves (citizens) of this country.

And among the things you left out is that it continues to make a LOT of offenses register for which the Feds don’t require registration. Those should just be nixed for 290. Conform to federal. The public has no idea all those lesser offenses have to register, they only hear about rape and child molestation. And conform to the time frames the feds require, which is a LOT less than in this bill. And we won’t even argue for that. I don’t know when we expect to get a better chance to argue for the best, this is the best… Read more »

California has the largest registry in the world, mostly filled people who are not a threat to society. If this list grows at its current rate, it could potentially possess as many as one out of every hundred people living in the state. At that point it will be such a massive boondoggle and sinkhole for tax payer money and police resources it will simply implode. However, if this law passes, and the registry is fixed at this point it probably will survive into perpetuity. So perhaps its better that this tumor grows so as to kill the entire sex… Read more »

Chester, magical thinking like that doesn’t result in registries disappearing or any actual progress. I heard the same kind of fantasy argument 25 years ago regarding prison overcrowding (“But they HAVE to let prisoners out because it is so crowded!”), yet the prisons were stuffed way beyond capacity until just the last few years. Are YOU really willing to wait 20 more years on the registry to see if your fantasy of the registry disappearing in a puff of magic smoke comes true? When I see comments like this, I assume they are being made by the few rich registrants… Read more »

Roger ~ I am not sure what, if anything a tiered registry will do. It might be great start, but maybe not if it will harm some registrants more than they are harmed now? Also, you said that it will finally prove that ex registrants will not reoffend. Well, that is the way it is now based on statistics, but who believes it? IT should have been proven all along. Again, I am on the fence but think, whatever happens, we will continue to fight to get the registry abolished once and for all…

I wish the tiered registry bill were a start. It is not, it is the end. The reality is that this bill is passed, this issue will not be touched again, this a nuclear bomb. That is not only the reality now, it will be the reality going foreard, this is always an issue in this society.

Dude, can you please tell me where I buy a machine that foretells the future too?

That’s the whole reason behind the push for the tiered proposal, to reduce the number of people who register – not based upon empirical evidence, but just to get people off the registry… not in an equal fashion.

10,000 will be off the registry without petitioning. The rest have to petition. Do you see equality in that? And why the arbitrary cutoff date?

I definitely understand your concerns, New Person and someone who cares. I see the unfair issues with this tiered bill. I also want it to be more just. As a tier 3, I won’t benefit from the bill as it is written. So why do I support it? Because it is NOT the FINAL step. Getting a tiered registry like the rest of the states is a FIRST step. Laws change constantly. And unlike a few years ago, we have advocacy groups like ACSOL to educate and share stories to push toward freedom for more and more of us. When… Read more »

roger… That’s the point: laws can change. It was on here that I read that NY extended an additional 10 years to the low level registrants after serving their 10 years to get off the registry. That actually happened! No. I don’t trust government b/c it’s run by people and people aren’t all that just. We have stats, but people are still clinging to the false facts that registrants re-offend at a high rate. If you’re a tier 3, then I’d be making an obvious civil case b/c you are denied the pursuit of privacy as granted to you by… Read more »

If there is another financial reason to go for the tiered approach to RSO; over the weekend the Governor propose spending a total of $33,000,000 on legal defense fund for illegals to fight deportation. If the bill will take thousands of us of the the registry then there is the money for the defense fund. Point to make to a appropriation committee??

Depending on underlying crime, a prison sentence doesn’t prevent the ability to get a COR. I spoke to Chance, Higbee, and a few other attorneys who confirmed this when I was looking for an attorney to ask if I am eligible. They all said yes even though I went to prison. Personally, I am in a strange position because while I would be able to get a CoR in 4 years under the current 290 scheme, I would be put into 2nd tier under tiered registry, so I would have to wait a total of 16 more years if this… Read more »

I’m assuming if Chance said you qualify for a COR in four years that you might qualify for an expungement now or very soon. I read in the current proposed tier system that anyone who has had their conviction dismissed by an expungement then they automatically qualify to submit for a COR no matter the conviction. Maybe worth looking into. Also, when the attorneys said you will qualify in four years for a COR did they say if granted the COR you would not have to register? I do not think that all COR’s relieves registering. In addition, if placed… Read more »

I was sentenced to prison, so I don’t qualify for expungement. Chance, Higbee & Assoc., and 2 other criminal defense lawyers all said COR will remove me from the sex offender registry. Again, right now all I’d have to do is wait four years to become eligible to file for a COR. If tiered registry passes, I’d have to wait until 2031 …. so obviously not happy about the tierd registry hype. But like I said hopefully others are helped???? As for people lucky enouge to get their cases expunged, where in the tiered bill does it say they automatically… Read more »

See below. i tried to open it again but it was not there. I’m sure there is a way to get a copy of the current bill as it is written.

CALIFORNIA
SUPPORT FOR TIERED REGISTRY BILL GROWING
April 24, 2017 ·68 Comments

mike r
April 25, 2017
here’s a link to the current Bill…

http://losangeles.networkofcare.org/pr/legislate/state-bill-text.aspx?id=531098&bill=SB%20421&sessionid=2017000

Not sure if this question belongs in this string but…has anyone with an “attempted 288(a)” received a COR? I have a good friend who is a criminal lawyer and he says NO WAY and yet I am getting deluged with letters want to ‘help get me off Megan;s”
Thanks

Persons convicted of a felony offense under Penal Code section 286(c), 288, 288.5 or 289(j) are not eligible for a Certificate of Rehabilitation. A Certificate of Rehabilitation may relieve some offenders from having to register as a sex offender under Penal Code section 290.

But you might want to look for a more recent documentation to verify if the list remains the same.

Careful with those letters. They’re generic. The firm simply combs Megan’s Law site for all local offenders and sends them notices. They don’t actually bother looking at what the offenses are. Once you contact them, that’s when they’ll actually look at your case. If you do actually decided to contact the people from one of these letters, be sure that your consultation is free. A legit lawyer should be able to look at your case and see if there’s an actual shot at winning it and tell you as much without charging you. Don’t hand over any money otherwise.

Be very wary of anyone who sends you a letter promising to get you relief from registering as a sex offender. The law currently provides only two methods for this relief: a Governor’s pardon and a certificate of rehabilitation. No California Governor, regardless of party, has granted a pardon to a registrant and we don’t expect that to happen during the term of the current Governor who has been unfriendly to our community. Very few registrants are eligible to apply for a Certificate of Rehabilitation and eligibility alone does not automatically result in termination of registration.

Janice, With what you just said is why I’m very confused. Essentially, you’re saying as a class that we’re not granted the right to pursue and obtain privacy (because a lot of us aren’t given a path to get off the registry). Registration is basically exposing one’s privacy. The California Constitution protects the pursuit and obtaining privacy – Article 1, Section 1. We’re treated as a class, as denoted in the 2000 Smith v Doe decision in its one of seven factors why registry is not punishment. As a class, we are not allowed to move beyond our station (i… Read more »

I am one of those who has been granted a COR along with expungement and I am still required to register. It’s very frustrating, I believed this would open up many doors specially in regards to employment, I applied for a job and even though I had expungement and COR I was denied because I was on the registry. My understanding is that any hiring employer cannot deny you for the simple fact of being on the registry?

Stumped ~ Are you sure you still have to register after getting a COR? I know an expungement will not relieve you but a COR, from what I have learned, is the only way to relieve you from the duty to register. Who is telling you this? Let me know as we are in the process of getting an expungement and the COR is next on the list.

The COR paperwork spells out which crimes it will not relieve the registration requirement. I have the 1203.4 and am in process on the COR with the hope that one day laws will change and relieve me of the requirement to register. Currently even if I get the COR no relief.

As stated by Janice the simple fact that if you receive a COR doesn’t automatically exclude you from registering, unfortunately I am one of those cases. Check with a lawyer to see if you would be one of them as well or not.

according to the 2003 Smith v Doe decision, it’s illegal b/c it would then constitute the regulatory scheme punitive. btw, did the company actually write down that you were denied specifically because you’re on the registry? If so. then I would like to say that 1203.4 (expungement) continues to punish you with such a penalty that prevents you from getting job. Seems odd that there are crimes that cannot qualify for 1203.4, but only registrants are the one who cannot reap in the benefits of 1203.4? Why even give them the option for 1203.4??? This is basically like giving a… Read more »

Yes in the reason I was denied a job it was stated that it was because I was on the registry

I haven’t posted or even read a post in 2 almost 3 years. You may remember me as the person whose daughter was born in 2014 and the social worker at the hospital called in the county human relations department on. My daughter, wife and I are all fine, still together and living in real housing. I’ve even managed to find new, better and better paying work still while complying with the current annual system thanks to the Fair Chance Ordinance in San Francisco that largely prevents employers from using any previous convictions against you. I won’t go into all… Read more »

SB421 is CURRENTLY in the “Suspense File” of the Appropriations Committee. Its supposed to have a “hearing” on 05/25. This is to determine if the cost of implementing this proposed law will be $50,000.00 or more, as appears to be the case NOW! Can the author of this bill PLEASE make the case the amount of money SAVED in implementing it will cancel out ANY “cost” in implementing it?

What does it take to get Weiner to do this?

87
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.