Assembly member Melissa Melendez has introduced a bill (AB 884) that would expand the requirement to register for a lifetime to anyone convicted of Penal Code Section 288(a) when the Tiered Registry Law takes effect in 2021. As currently written, the Tiered Registry Law authorizes individuals convicted of the same penal code section to petition for removal from the registry after a minimum of 20 years.
“We must stop this bill!” exclaimed ACSOL Exeuctive Director Janice Bellucci. “If the bill is passed, at least 40 percent of the people on the California registry will continue to be punished for a lifetime due to their requirement to register.”
The bill is expected to be referred to the Assembly Public Safety Committee where it could be heard as early as March 23. This is the first of many steps required before the bill could be passed.
Melendez is a Republican and represents the 67th Assembly district. Her district offices is in Murrieta, California.
If these politicians thought it would get them more votes, they’d have us tattooed across our faces. How can people be this terrible without ever having to face any consequences?
What should we do to fight this???
Another road block to agonize about for a few months. She refuses to listen to statistics and just wants to feed the fear machine. I believe she tries every year to pass some new BS.
John Gardner was convicted of 288 (a) and went on to murder Amber Dubois form Escondido. His case was 8 years ago and there hasn’t been another one like it since. That’s one out of 44,000 288 (a’s) on the registry. I’d like to know how many sex offender bills she’s tried to pass in the last 5 years. Luckily, most of her bills have been stopped in the PS comittee.
This bill must be stopped. Furthermore, why am I being required by Sacramento County to register at my campus police? I am not residing on campus but yet am forced to register every semester with campus police.
It is really ridiculous and must be addressed that a section 288.2 requires lifetime registration. So if a person actually commits an offense involving actual sexual acts with a five year old that person is a tier two but yet a person that suggest or even talks about a meeting with a 13 year old for sex is lifetime?
additionally, with the chief of police of a campus of the University of California, the
California State University, or community college if that
person is residing upon the campus or in any of its facilities, within
five working days of coming into, or changing his or her residence
within, any city, county, or city and county, or campus in which
they temporarily resides, reside, and shall register
thereafter in accordance with the Act, unless the duty to register
is terminated pursuant to Section 290.5 or as otherwise provided
by law.
Hell for that matter, if you talk to any minor 17 or younger about sex or about meeting for sex 288.2.(a)(2) you are a tier three offender. So you are in what they consider the worst of the worst of repeat and violent offenders. Absolutely crazy…………
Well guess I will be filing in CA courts in the upcoming months. No one else is so here I go again. Win or lose I will not stand down. That 288.2.(a)(2) puts me in tier three and I will not stop fighting ever as long as there is a breath of life in me.
This bill must be stopped
WTF, has CA Supreme Court ever addressed a challenge to CA 290 since 2004? I cannot find any case from the CA SC on this… Can anyone cite any? Specifically a state constitutional challenge????
This woman is relentless. She’s tired of getting her ASS kicked with this issue and she’s back to prove it!
Time to kick IT again!!!!!
You can contact her here on her webpage. https://lcmspubcontact.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.php?district=AD67&inframe=Y
She may not reply but if just 1% of ca registered offenders, contacted her, educating her on the lack of safety this provides, perhaps her or the people around her will take notice.
I really expect that many of these Registry Nazis will understand one thing and one thing only. Just like Germany’s Nazis did.
Here we go! I wondered how long it would take for some of these idiot politicians to start “chipping away” at the law that allows for registration relief!!! Yes, we must fight this, because if this passes, then more will follow until NOBODY can get relief from registration. Fight! Fight! Fight!
The most unfair thing about this is the perception the public will have being listed as a “tier 3” offender = high risk. If you are a repeat offender with 288 (a) you are already considered high risk/predator. If you’ve been on the list for 20 or thirty something years and all of a sudden you show up online as high risk tier 3 that’s bs. Throwing 40% more into that category seems like a lack of due process which i believe the 6th circuit said was unconstitutional. At least there is some precedence. This bill is purely based on not liking the crime. Although not really publicized there is already a tiering system here. Low risk (tier 1), serious offender (tier 2) high risk/predator (tier 3). I would assume most of that %40 are serious offender status.
The entire bill is a joke. It ois a ruse to get around the constitutional challenge of no tailoring.
Now add in 288(a) and you have pretty much everyone covered. There is no way that this can stand as people that are considered extremely low to less risk than the general population are going into tiers with violent repeat offenders for life. This is immediately a equal protection violation as the legislature must explain itself and have a good reason to classify an individual into a class of offenders if challenged on an as-applied case.
To challenge successfully a legislative classification under the rational basis test, a party must prove that the facts on which the legislature may have relied in shaping the classification “could not reasonably be conceived to be true by the governmental decisionmaker.” Vance v. Bradley, 440 U.S. 93, 111, 99 S. Ct. 939, 949, 59 L.Ed.2d 171 (1979).
The court must conduct a “serious and genuine judicial inquiry into the correspondence between the classification and the legislative goals.” Newland v. Board of Governors, 19 Cal.3d 705, 711, 139 Cal. Rptr. 620, 623, 566 P.2d 254, 258 (1977). As mentioned supra, this correspondence fails when viewed in light of the data CASOMB repeatedly supplies to the Legislature.
I believe strongly that this assemblywoman must have been sexually assaulted at sometime in her life. What seems as a rally cry for justice by her is pain be getting more pain and doing more harm…Nothing happens in a vacuum. The sad fruit of these kind of actions and measures will only serve to come back on her head in one form or another. It’s a spiritual law thing.
Janice, Im sure you’ll let us know when/where to send letters and make phone calls. I will gladly participate.
It is clear she is using the SOR as a punishment tool.
Now is a good time to make a donation. Done.
I was so angry after hearing this I had take it out on some firewood that needed splitting. AB dumb lump of dead wood… I was expecting this. There is a handful of politicians here in So Cal who use SO hating to buy votes. Time now to leave the wood alone and bang out some letters!
Now do you people see I was right in not trusting the tiered registry???
This literally affects me. This was my conviction. And I never thought in my wildest dreams I would ever be permitted to petition for removal from the registry.
Now, not only have I learned that I would be eligible, but that someone is actively trying to take it away. Please keep hs posted and let us know anything and everything we can do to stop this bill.
“This is the first of many steps required before the bill could be passed.”
Can someone explain the timeline of this and at what are the major milestone we have to be aware of along that timeline. Thank you.
@James.
Well if we did have to register every 90 days that would make us registering 4 times a year. Since the people that sponsored the original bill did it with the intention of lessening the burden on law enforcement this would actually quadruple that burden or at least double it since 50% of us would be in that category. Since Melendez is a Republican i would imagine she won’t get a lot of support, especially after this last election.
20 years is a long time as it is.
20 years, whether a completed act or an attempt.
This is cruel.
And does not protect children.
It’s really cynical, dark politics.