ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)


CA Assembly Committee Passes New Tiered Registry Bill SB 384

The Assembly’s Public Safety Committee passed the new Tiered Registry (SB 384) tonight by a vote of 5 to 2. All those voting in support of the bill were Democrats; all voting in opposition to the bill were Republicans.

Senator Scott Wiener was unavailable to present the bill at the hearing because the Senate had not yet adjourned. Therefore, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez-Fletcher, a member of the Public Safety Committee, presented the bill. During the hearing, Gonzalez-Fletcher stated that she “hesitated to support” earlier versions of the tiered registry bill, but “felt much better” about the current version of the bill because it assigns all offenses involving children to Tier 3.

Also speaking in support of the bill were a deputy district attorney from Los Angeles and a spokesperson from the City of San Francisco. The deputy DA described the bill as both pro-law enforcement and pro-safety. He told committee members that no one will be removed from the registry without a “full screening” by local law enforcement and the local DA’s office.

According to the deputy DA, it is time to change a law that has been in place and not changed since 1947. He added that the registry today is not used to solve crimes.

In addition to this testimony, nine individuals representing nine organizations briefly stated their support for the bill. The organizations include the ACLU, Equality California, CA Attorneys for Criminal Justice and the Los Angeles Sheriff. Although ACSOL attended the hearing, ACSOL did not speak either in favor of or in opposition to the bill. In fact, there was no one present who spoke in opposition to the bill.

If the bill is to become law, it must be passed by the full Assembly and then return to the Senate for a concurrence vote. Both actions are expected to take place on Friday, September 15.

Join the discussion

  1. Janice Bellucci

    The Assembly just passed the Tiered Registry Bill (SB 384) by a vote of 42 to 22! The next and final legislative step is a concurrence vote in the Senate which should take place later today. An affirmative vote is expected.

    • AlexO

      Man, I’m so meh on this. It’s so bad that I kind of hoped it failed. While at the same it passing and then being amended to not be insane by the time it takes effect would obviously be a positive but there’s no guarantee it won’t actually get worse. At the moment, my biggest concern is that it might be amended further to include our job being listed and having to register more frequently. Both of those would be a killer for me emotional as well as actually, potentially, costing me my job. I know neither of these things are in the current bill, but it is a concern considering that’s how it is in many other states. And of course we’re all hoping SCOTUS will make this whole thing moot. That would be the ultimate justice, long overdue.

    • tom

      Hi Janice,
      Someone had already brought this up, but I was hoping you can enlighten me about the provision in the bill that makes all violators of section 288.2 tier 3 according to the bill section 290 (C)(x)…If one is convicted of 288.2(b), which does NOT involve child pornography as defined by the explicit definition of the assembly bill analysis, where it specifically says:
      “….x) sending harmful matter to a child that depicts a minor(s) engaged in sexual conduct;…”

      can my conviction of this 288.2(b)-which involved only sending harmful matter- be thus listed as a tier 3, even though it involved NO sending of such an act as defined above?
      Or will I need to take it to the courts to rectify this overextension of the bill?
      Thanks in advance for your feedback…

      • AlexO

        You’ll likely have to go to court. The bill doesn’t offer any individual analysis to tier people. It simply looks at the code in black and white. I think that’s why Janice mentioned in another thread that should the bill take effect as is (or worse), most people would have a case under the 14th Amendment. There’s going to be a slew of lawsuits. Guaranteed. I’d start saving money for a lawyer now while praying to whatever gods you choose that SCOTUS does the right thing this time around.

  2. ExpatRFSO

    This bill has passed both houses. On to the Governor now.

    Bill analysis and how each legislator voted:

  3. Magic myke

    Reading this bill is like something from NASA. So im a 288.a(i) i was 18 im 38 now. Any hope for me. Also i moved but i still follow cali law for the lifetime reg even though i live in texas. Thanks

    • jo

      You would be eligible to file petition in a few years when it goes into effect

  4. Kenneth

    I was convicted of 647.6a in 2003, successfully completed the terms of my informal probation in 2006. Also I petitioned and was granted a motion of dismissal(1203.4) for this offense in 2006, and also was granted exclusion from internet disclosure that same year. How would SB 384 effect me?

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 *