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.
““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.”
Agrhhhhhhhhh….spits on the ground and walks away to dinner…either perturbed or unhappy or something.
Good Luck to All
Best Wishes, James
According to Fletcher “All offenses involving children are tier 3” 288(a) tier 3?
I am sorry to hear this pass. I was enthusiastically positive in the beginning but after the amendments, it was a horrible bill. I read the comments people say about just get it passed then it can be modified. I dont know. I have a conviction steming from asking a person who said they were 18 to send me nude photos. I got a bad attorney. The DA offered probation but against my direction he refused saying it still carried registration. He wasnt familiar with the expungement process apparantly. The DA said that the email I sent was obscene in itself and I walked away with a 16 month prison sentence with 311.11, 311.4, and 288.3 on my record. My only hope was getting a COR. Well now I am confused. I have read the bill several times. First it lists 290.5 and outlines the COR and that it would eleminate the registration requirement for …. then it lists another 290.5 and talks about petitioning for removal after your tier requirement has been met. So which is it? Can someone be removed from the registry if they obtain a COR and its applicable to the crime OR when they meet their tier obligation, or is the COR forgotten and the only way is now the tiers? I find it absolutely ubsurd that I have an internet no contact offense and I am a Tier 3 and a Lewd and Lascivious with someone under 14 is 20 years. I am not saying those RC dont deserve a chance I just dont believe in their lumping everyone in based on the penal code alone. Someone can be like me never seeing an actual image of CP or someone who had a large Terabyte collection and we still get the same charge 311.11. There has to be a basis for fighting this in the courts. What can we do to fight this. The only reason I plead guilty was because I had the hope of the COR. If that is taken away then whay. Is this going to apply retroactively? They say this isnt punishment. Have them live it for a year and see what they say.
So they “felt better” about supporting a law that still applies lifetime registration to a broad group of people who’s crimes have varying degrees of severity and who have varying degrees of rehabilitation success, regardless of how it violates the federal constitution, being cruel and unusual, and the California constitution, blocking an individual’s ability to remain private.
I’m happy some will find relief through this law, but it feels like they just chipped a piece out of the gargantuan, crushing concrete block that is SORA.
This law changes nothing for me for now except for possibly enabling further, harsher additional punishments (Since I’ll be tier 3) with one hand while using this law as a shield from criticism with the other.
Seems like pursuing the constitutional option makes more sense. I haven’t seen ACSOL’s official stance on the idea. May have missed it.
I guess all we can do now is pray Snyder goes in our favor and the whole “assigning tier levels without an individual assessment” is unconstitutional. I don’t think it’s time to worry yet.
I can’t support this bill the way it is. This goes against the original purpose of even going to a tiered system in the first place. Take down the f*ing registry already.
Sorry to keep posting but I thought of another reality that came up. I have tried twice now to get my Contractors License. The second time appealing the decision all the way up to the administrative court. I was arguing it was NOT related to contracting and unless they can prove it did they could not deny my license. Well, the Attorney General ignored that fact and kept saying I hadn’t proved rehabilitation yet as I was still on Parole. In my argument, I didn’t have to prove rehabilitation since it didn’t apply it shouldn’t be a consideration in the first place. The judge told me that once I prove I have the certificate of rehabilitation to reapply and then they couldn’t argue the charge anymore. She set my next application date to when I would be eligible for COR. Well, guess that getting that License is out of the question as well. Thank you, California.
So……CP misdemeanor is Tier 3……?
A political legislative approach may be necessary, but after Colorado and elsewhere, there better damn well be some CA court cases brought to bring this whole cash cow registry system down.
The legislature will never base this on empirical evidence and facts. Just a continuation of rampant unending myth, fear, punishment, and CYA BS.
Good for Senator Scott Weiner, but by the time amendments get into these bills, it’s the same or worse than status quo.
That’s about as positive – not much – that I (and we with me) can muster after seeing another red herring. Maybe I’ll feel better later, but as is, don’t bet on it.
And we’re supposed to roll over in thanks to people in legislature who don’t even take the time to learn the facts.
Ridiculous. Sickening.
I agree. I can’t support this bill when we have a chance to remove registry.
This is catastrophic for so many us whose good lives will be totally destroyed, not to mention spouses and children. So much for trying to live the good life. There’s no reward in that.
Hurray, finally a real light at the end of this tunnel.
I’m honestly not too worried at the moment (I know it’s ironic considering I was one of the loudest voices during the last few rounds and am currently T3 like most). The bill still needs to pass a few more rounds and then we still have over three years to make changes (Janice said as much earlier).
The politicians are spineless for any change that’s against public opinion, particularly something like this. So they have to crap all over a bill like this and make all these bold statements of how they’re looking out for the children. Then when changes occur in the future (likely through the courts), they can still have the illusion that they were fighting for the “right thing” and it was the courts and sleazy lawyers finding “loopholes” called the Constitution.
Does “hesitated to support” the bill mean she would have voted against it and it would not have passed without the amendments? The natural followup would be, Would it ever pass without them?
It is understandable that many will be disappointed with this version. There is a lot I don’t like about it either, but as it is, as someone already pointed out, we are all Tier 3s right now.
Yes the certificate of rehabilitation is dead. However I have a question. Here are the facts. I was convicted under 311.11 in 2013. My understanding of this bill is that if you have a felony violation of 311.11 you are a tier 3. However this does not apply if it’s a misdemeanor conviction. Since my conviction was in 2013 can I still apply for an expungement and reduction? If so, then this actually provides me some hope because it’s my understanding that you can’t get off the registry no matter what kind of conviction it is for 311.11.
I’m confused as hell:
” . 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.”
I thought 288(a) were tier 2 offenses now, provided there are no repeats, etc.. Could someone shed some light on this please
it’s this damn section on page 6 describing what a tier 2 is that is so damn confusing: Shit in plain English please what is a tier 2 offender???
registration pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3).
line 8 (2) (A) A tier two offender is subject to registration for a
line 9 minimum of 20 years. A person is a tier two offender if the person
line 10 was convicted of an offense described in subdivision (c) that is
line 11 also described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 or subdivision
line 12 (c) of Section 1192.7, Section 285, subdivision (f), (g), (h), or (i)
line 13 of Section 286, subdivision (c) of Section 288, subdivision (f), (g),
line 14 (h), or (i) of Section 288a, subdivision (b), (d), or (e) of Section
line 15 289, or Section 647.6 if it is a second or subsequent conviction for
line 16 that offense that was brought and tried separately.
I refuse to get anywhere near “excited” about this piece of “gut and amend” legislation! The legislature is playing the legislative equivalent of “Surivior”, and I will be surprised if these newly “gutted and amended” legislation makes it to a “3rd Reading vote” by Friday (the deadline for bills to pass!). Then there is the Governor. A governor who won’t even CONSIDER PARDONING 290 registrants, sure as hell probably won’t sign any legislation that will get them off any “lifetime registry” (even if it is not until 2021!).
So what is the hope here again?
No, I think that is the TRAIN’S headlight coming toward us.
This bill solves absolutely nothing. It addresses nothing specifically. This bill just shuffles the punitive deck of cards these people love to play with. It just makes things worse. It seems to me that totally destroying people is the opium for some people. The way this bill is will not reduce the amount of people to a manageable level.
Wow, what a nightmare. I sure hope that someone will oppose this, to the Assembly and or the Senate!
“no one will be removed from the registry without a “full screening” by local law enforcement”
Again, pulling for Colorado, this is like someone throwing a drowning man an anchor
Yeah, trying to understand for sure CP misdemeanor 311.11(a) tier 1?
Also trying to understand if in 2022 I’ll suddenly start being displayed on the Megan’s law site. Currently I’m not listed publicly.
I’d say that we all got “played.” We got sucked into this process, agonized over what would turn out to be the best possible, yet completely unattainable, version while legislators got to bask in the warm glow of pragmatic and socially responsive “reform” and then, like Lucy pulling the football at the last moment, we end up possibly as bad, and perhaps worse (has someone done a thoroughgoing analysis of what this damned thing actually means?) than we were at the beginning of the process. We just got another blunt reminder that our time is worth nothing. That decades of our lives are without value and that other people can waste them with impunity.
I watched a YouTube video of the July 12 Public Safety Committee hearing earlier today and was struck at the number of people who approached the mic and enthusiastically voiced their support for, what was then, SB421. These are people who gave their time and their resources to stand up, in good faith, to support a modestly better travesty of justice. Many were Registrants, or family members of Registrants, who have suffered for years the torments of small-minded injustice in the hope that sincerity and earnestness would be met with a modicum of humanity and intelligence. With this bill they will receive neither. I think that a very public rebuke of this bill from ACSOL, if it becomes law, may be in order. We do have a civil liberties constituency, small though it may be, but one that is definitely growing, who should be made aware that this law will fall very short of exacting any meaningful justice. No one should be under any illusions that it will be in aid of justice – though it cynically masquerades as such – and we will need to point it out for most to realize it.
@JM based on my reading of the law, yes. Misdemeanor child porn possession is tier 1. It is only tier 3 if charged as a felony. And no the bill stipulates very clearly only tiers 2 and 3 will be on it. If you have a misdemeanor CP charge you are good to go. And by go I mean off of this thing, if it’s been ten years since your conviction of course. By the way did you have it reduced to a misdemeanor? If so when?
I think they are using this bill as a game on registered citizens because they are not really letting anyone off the registry for the real stuff, but let those off that did something minor and harmless, this is not fair, pressure should be put on about the bill to include all registrants to file for petition to get off after 10-20 years regardless of tier levels, so they can move on with their lives untroubled and unmolested, and making it too much work for the law enforcement,and it’s unconstitutional.