When the Beaumont police detective called him in 2014, Curtis wondered what the officer might want. His only run-in with the law had been half a lifetime ago.
In 1985, he had been charged with indecency with a child, his stepdaughter. Curtis, then 34, struck a deal with prosecutors. He would plead guilty, but if after 10 years he kept out of trouble, the conviction would go away. He paid his fees, performed his community service and attended sex offender counseling. The charge was dismissed in 1996.
He kept a low, steady profile. Over the next three decades, he raised his three boys in the house in which he’s always lived. He worked at a nearby chemical plant until his retirement in 2009.
So the news from the detective was alarming. Despite the deal he’d cut with the state of Texas 30 years ago, Curtis was dismayed to learn that he now would have to register as a sex offender. His name, photo and details of his crime would appear on the state’s public website. He would need to check in with police regularly. The new rules, the detective informed Curtis, applied for the rest of his life. Full Article
Not surprising, lawmakers will keep making unconstitutional laws until they are slapped down by a judge.😡
(The news article linked to this one is quite ironic. Apparently, Texas is failing to curb its “ballooning sex offender registry”. Well, duh, ya’think? When the legislature keeps coming up with new laws to increase the number of people who are required to register, common sense would tell you that you will increase the size of the registry.
Florence Shapiro is one of the worst. Her husband Howard Shapiro is a sex offender attorney!! She made the laws and he defends against them!! what a cozy deal! I hate these people.
This is one of the best articles I’ve ever read about the registry. We should all keep reading it! Maybe the hits will keep on the front page.
I am sorry, but the police officer is quite incorrect:
SEC. 16. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or any law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be made.
My situation is like that of some of the men in the article. I did a plea deal for 10 years deferred adjudication in 1992. Registration wasn’t even mentioned because it wasn’t applicable to me at the time. I was supposed to be free and clear when my 10 years were up, provided I successfully completed my probation, which I did. However, in 1997 I was made to register for life.
I hope this new lawsuit is successful, as it seems that relief would be due me as well.
At the Rome of sentencing a lot of us never were told we’d be all over the internet, placed with and identifier on our passports, banned from attending our kids school functions, socially banned from society with little to no hope of having a job or career. I’m sure I missed a few things.
I am actually in one of the lawsuits filed in federal court in Dallas. I was arrested in 91 pled in 93 got off in 2003. I also took deferred adjudication and moved to the Midwest were they said i do not have to register. I have since changed my name and live free of any harassment.
Same thing happened to me. I was arrested at 18 1991. Pled guilty in 1993 did 10 yrs deferred and dismissed in 2003. I moved to the Midwest where since than i changed my name and live free….
No, the state where I live said it does not violate anything. CR, I would like to move back to Texas due to parents getting older and visit more frequently.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
§ Case No. : 3:18-cv-629
JOHN DOES #1-153 individually and on §
behalf of all others similarly situated §
§ CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
GREG ABBOTT, Governor of the §
State of Texas, and COLONEL §
STEVEN MCCRAW, Director of the §
Texas Department of Public Safety, §
We have a problem here in California that state authorities and legislators can constantly move the goal posts on you if you take a plea deal. This is the reality that was forged in Doe v. Harris. Common sense would tell you if you are coming to an agreement, both sides agree to the terms and it is assumed you know what you are agreeing to in accepting the requirements of being a registrant. But since they can change those requirements at any time there’s no way to know what you are really agreeing to. So thanks to Doe v. Harris, the court gave the state permission to negotiate in bad faith.
This happened to me in CA. In 1997 I was only 19 years old and was going to fight the charges they had against me. The DA pointed out that I would only have to register for 10 years. (that was the law back then after you got a COR). I even have it in writing, but they were able to switch it to lifetime and not allow a COR for my offense after the laws changed. I think this crap happens all the time. We basically have no rights even though they’ve supposedly been restored.
HI Timmy & Trish
Yes, you are correct pursuant to my state’s procedure the state I currently live in is not a SORNA state and I am not convicted under Deferred Adjudication from Texas (correct). This is not considered a conviction in this state I live in. I have not reported this and either has my state reported this to Texas. This was there process and after speaking to an Attorney in my state (quote “As long as you are not requiring registering in the state you reside in you are okay” Now here is the big question. Please chime in on this one After Texas transferred me to this state a year later the state sent me a letter saying you are not required to register. Ok 8 yrs. later Texas placed me back on… Now am I in violation? The attorney I hired did not know everything about the SORNA act, but at least I think he researched enough to know… but like all attorney’s he may have thumbed through it. But the fact is my state did grant me change without hesitation and the AG’s office did not contest and contact the Feds and the state of Texas….. That is the big question Two states are not under SORNA but. I am away from TEXAS…..