MI: Supreme Court Rules in Sex Offender Registry Case

Michigan’s Supreme Court says a Detroit-area man who served probation and community service after being charged with touching a girl’s breast when he was 19 can be removed from a sex offender registry. Full Article

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Good. Registry should be done away as a whole, but at the very least individuals who have had their cases dismissed should be released from the duty to register. Anything short of releasing a person from registering is nearly pointless as its the absolute biggest stain one can have on their record. Someone with a murder record would have an easier time finding a home and a job than someone with a “clean” record but on a registry.

A lot of us here in California are on the same boat. We have expunged records and don’t have to disclose that to potential employers, yet we’re still required to register. Once an employer finds out about 290 status, they’ll let you go anyway despite 290.46(L) So when do we get to see a case like this here in California?

Hey folks,

I am from Michigan and I am one of those HYTA registrants that has no criminal conviction but still has to register. If you read the order carefully, it only removed the defendant in question because the registry was created AFTER he was sentenced to probation and the Holmes Youthful Training Act (HYTA). From that prospective, it cannot be retroactively applied. I would have thought that instead of a\n short “order”, the justices would have wrote an “Opinion” (like they normally due on important matters) on the whole ISSUE with HYTA and registration. They did not. The “order” only removed him due to the registry was not around at the time of his sentencing. The legislatures may use this to fix the system, however this court order in no way, shape, or form states that being assigned to HYTA is punishment or unconstitutional to register even though you have no conviction. So basically, all those remaining HYTA defendants sentenced AFTER the creation of the registry in 1995 are stuck on the registry. What baffles me is there was a TON of briefs, etc on the HYTA issue and how it is cruel and unusual punishment to make someone register, who has NO CONVICTION. Whats the point of pleading to this “diversion program”, if the sealed record is actually reflected on the registry? How stupid is that? After all the in depth briefs filed, the justices wrote a very TINY “order” reversing the court of appeals decision and allowed the defendant to be removed from the registry.

This is a very important legal matter, and justices in other states such as the Muniz case wrote an actual lengthy OPINION. Why on earth would these justices create a tiny ORDER that doesn’t hardly address anything?? That’s Michigan for you.

Does anybody know what’s going on with Michigan and Does vs Snyder? When does the ACLU plan on filing their class action? If anybody has heard anything I’d be interested to know it…