The Criminal Law Advisory Committee of the the Judicial Council of California has prepared and released four draft forms to be used when the petitioning process of the Tiered Registry Law becomes effective in July 2021. Comments regarding the draft forms is due to the Committee no later than June 9, 2020.
The four draft forms include: Petition to Terminate Sex Offender Registration (CR-415), Acknowledgment of Receipt by Law Enforcement/District Attorney (CR-416), Response by District Attorney to Petition (CR-417) and Order on Petition (CR-418). In addition, the Council has prepared an information sheet with instructions regarding how to file a petition (CR-415INFO). A link to all of the forms is provided below.
“It is encouraging that the Committee is seeking comments from the public regarding its draft forms,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.
The draft petition form (CR-415) consists of three pages with a total of 10 questions. Most of the questions in the draft petition form require the petitioner to check a box or to provide a short answer such as the name of the county in which the petitioner is currently registered. The petition also requires petitioners to provide proof of current registration.
In addition to completing the petition form, registrants will be required to file the petition in the Superior Court where they reside as well as provide copies of the petition to law enforcement and the district attorney in the county where they reside and/or the county in which they were convicted if different.
Two of the three remaining forms are to be completed by law enforcement and/or the district attorney. The fourth form is to be completed by the judge who reviews the petition. Judges may grant a petition without a hearing if the district attorney does not object to it.
According to the draft forms, a district attorney may object to a petition for the following reasons: (1) community safety would be significantly enhanced by the petitioner’s continued registration, (2) petitioner has not met the minimum time period for registration and (3) petitioner has been assigned to Tier 3 and does not fall under the risk level exception. The draft form also allows a district attorney to choose “other” as the reason to object to a petition. If the district attorney objects to a petition, a hearing before a judge will be held.
Regardless of whether the district attorney objects to a petition, a Superior Court judge will make the final decision regarding whether a petition is granted. If the petition is granted, a person is no longer required to register in the state of California. According to the draft form, a judge may deny a petition for three reasons: petitioner has not met the minimum time period for registration, petitioner has been assigned to Tier 3 and does not fall under the risk level exception or community safety would be significantly enhanced by the petitioner’s continued registration.
“ACSOL will prepare and send comments regarding the draft forms to the Criminal Law Advisory Committee,” stated Bellucci. “If an individual wants his or her comments to be considered as part of ACSOL’s comments, those comments should be sent to ACSOL no later than June 1.” Comments regarding the draft forms may be provided to ACSOL by email at service@all4consolaws.org or by U.S. mail to 1215 K Street, 17th Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Comments may also be sent directly to the Criminal Law Advisory Committee on the Judicial Council website at www.courts.ca.gov/policyadmin-invitationstocomment.htm or by mail to 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102-3688. The Committee has requested that individuals comment on the proposed form using the comment form provided below.
Downloads:
Petition Forms – Comment Form – April 2020 [MS Word]
Petition Forms – Draft – April 2020 [PDF]
no longer register in California, so what if a individual moves to *example* texas/chicago/ny/Philadelphia for 6 months or moves out of country? yes its a 2 part question, and would there be an additional box or option to *maybe* reduce from a felony to a misdemeanor or even lower so when & if back ground check is conducted that doesn’t show? and would there also be automatic exclusion from the web? and what would the grace period before all is done and completed after all is submitted?
Wow! I didn’t think they’d let tier 3 people petition at all this is is awesome.
Wait, what @Jack? Apparently tier 3 can petition. It would be futile since tier 3 are for life. Did I miss something?
Anyone can file a petition at any time any ways. Without no arbitrary perimeters invoked by the legislature on the courts.
“In addition to completing the petition form, registrants will be required to file the petition in the Superior Court where they reside as well as provide copies of the petition to law enforcement and the district attorney in the county where they reside and/or the county in which they were convicted if different.”
Quote from this post:
====
According to the draft forms, a district attorney may object to a petition for the following reasons:
(1) community safety would be significantly enhanced by the petitioner’s continued registration,
(2) petitioner has not met the minimum time period for registration and
(3) petitioner has been assigned to Tier 3 and does not fall under the risk level exception.
====
I do not like reason (1). Reason (1) has already been deliberated upon at the sentencing and subsequent court appearances such as the awarding of 1203.4, reduction of charge, or Certificate of Rehabilitation. Also, the deliberation continued on in the categorization of the tiers and who belongs to them.
Reason (1) feels like double jeopardy. You are getting re-tried based upon your initial conviction to prolong being on the registry. This feels like a parole hearing than a regulatory scheme.
Fear mongering is the best tool for the DA. The punishment continues because of the possibility of something horribly to occur, yet obscures the fact that your initial conviction and possible subsequent court appearances has categorized you into the tiered section the legislature already created (or still creating). Reason (1) essentially allows the DA to *not follow the law* set forth by the tiers such that the DA can continually move the goal post. Is this a parole hearing to be released or is this a statutory scheme burdened by supposedly free citizens?
I want a job. I want a good paying job, but the registry prevents that as I’ve been thwarted from job offers due to the registry.
I would like to travel freely, meaning no in-person registration or need to present yourself to the local PD to announce you’re a danger to society by still being on the registry. What isn’t punishable in California is punishable in other states! Re:Taylor exists only in California.
This registry scheme puts a halt on life and the DAs don’t see us as humans who made a mistake and deserve another chance. The registry is just the extension of being under custody of the state. If you’re in jail, there are differences between certain tanks. Some tanks you are locked down for 20 hours a day with rules, restrictions, and other instructions by the Law Enforcement (LE) in charge. Other tanks you are out 12 hours a day with similar LE custodial supervision. On probation or parole, your jail environment has expanded, but you’re still under custodial supervision. Once you are no longer under custody (out of jail, parole, or probation), you are still under custody of the state with at least one in-person registration, several restrictions, several rules, and specified banishment (the US Military can banish you from their premises). Today’s registry is an extension of still being under custody. The compliance checks alone is akin to LE checking in on your cell in jail or at home for parole or probation. The constant fingerprinting and taking pictures is treating you like you’re getting booked every single year you do it which is identified by your birthday – which is a psychological infringement beyond your own court punishment.
In Smith v Doe, 2003, the case focused on the Alaska registry system where one only had to mail in your information and nothing prevented travel or occupation, to which the SCOTUS said it wasn’t punishment. We’re well beyond that. Janice and team have proved presence and residency restrictions were unconstitutional, but the registry remained. And continues to balloon as your status is will be on your passports and, possibly, Real IDs. The demarcation are your scarlet letters.
There should be no reason the DA gets a second bite at the apple with Reason (1). If a registrant qualifies to de-register, then the DA already had a part of that as the registrant is categorized into tier 1 or tier 2. Why does the DA get to re-visit the same case again and tack on more years? Isn’t that now considered punishment because the DA gets to elevate the suspension complete liberty?
The California Constitution has an inalienable right to pursue and obtain privacy. Why does the DA have more power than the California Constitution to continue the suspension of obtaining privacy when it’s an inalienable right? With that said, there shouldn’t be any lifetime registration in California at all because it completely negates the inalienable right to pursue and obtain privacy, which is written explicitly in the California Constitution.
It sure seems as though you could simply file a very similar petition arguing you are no longer a danger and demanding the state prove otherwise. Sure we have Conn v Doe, but that was not on a substantive claim nor was it in a state court. I bet you get a panel of state appellant judges or the state SC and you could make a good argument you would see a favorable response. Then a judge is not bound by arbitrary perimeters as stated, and they are bound by the local appellant courts and the CA SC, which I cannot even find if the CA SC has ever ruled on these issues when it comes to these newer rules and restrictions. Either way I will be filing something this summer for sure.
Every CA SC case I have seen has been not favorable to the state or to the registration schemes.
Will comments on this forum be considered input? If so, here goes….
This tiered registry is a fustercluck of epic proportions. ACSOL was wrong to ever support a tiered registry, and certainly this one. Dead wrong. The only acceptable response to this bill is “No way. The only good registry is no registry’.
The legislature is not the place to affect change. Progress happens in the courts. I correct myself. The only acceptable response to this bill is “No way. The only good registry is no registry. See you in court!”
I quote from ACSOL’s beliefs in the footer on this very page: “The public sex offender registry and residency restriction laws do not protect children but instead ostracize and dehumanize individuals and their families.”
When did it become acceptable to leave thousands – many for completely arbitrary reasons – on a registry that “does not protect children but instead ostracize and dehumanize individuals and their families.”? Whatever happened to “justice for all”?
Maybe, but if you don’t ultimately want the registry gone….well that just means you support it.
Lawyers in the state are already advertising their services for removal. I got a advertisement in the mail, today, from one. They apparently he got my address from the Megan Law website.
While I don’t like things about the tiered registry system, I think the forms lay out the law’s requirements fairly well. I will look over the documents and send in my comments for consideration. At least this article helps clarify to me how I will approach applying to get off the registry after 27 years. Thanks for posting the article Janice!
I’ve asked like 3 or 4 times now…. I’d like to know if there’s going to be any fighting the extension triggered by a FTR???
Mine was 14 yrs ago and it was a one off to make a long story short. I did 4 months in Jail and I took a FELONY charge for it, 3 years of Probation and a fine of I think it was $2k. Not to mention I lost my wife, my job, and the roof over my head in the process.
I can’t be certain but, I’m pretty sure I paid for my misstep.
I also truly believe those of us that have Registered for 20+ yrs are owed reparations for the PTSD the Registry has caused each and every one of us.
So, for out of state offenders, one must be a resident to file for termination? How would someone who travels to CA occasionally petition if they are not registered?
Can someone cite CA SC cases that have upheld registries? I have been doing this for many years and I have yet to see a direct CA SC case upholding the current scheme.
I’m impressed Janice I have to applaude you and the team. While it just doesn’t make since to spend a lot of money or to take money or incarcerate in many ways of maybe someone just for talking dirty via the internet their is still the inducement one must lock at, The therapist reports labels character, etc. or labels someone crazy, than another diagnose”s one sane in this badgering to show pictures for some vain way one has to wonder who’s doing the temptation and who’s doing the vain glory. Even this teir status is a micky mouse of a Dante’s infernol or is everyone out in CA goning Japanese! A good study for all on here that may give understand today in this registry government/ political scheme. I hope someone still registered someone when they are borned or do we all take that as a natural.
Constutional or Unconstutional who is going back to their roots. Yes the movie series was good but it have meaning or is white man still speaking with fork tongue. Remember ask not what the contury can do for you but what you can do for the country. One wonders if Einstein went crazy or did a group of his peers give him a teir level or a get out of town notice or hang em high. Actually much of this going against the grain of the good book and yes I do believe government is losing its salt in many ways or is this pandermic some carter has liver pill to take for a cure all.
I symposize with your comments in California. Myself I’m against the registry methods and many ways. This home improvement of this teir thing sound’s good. I just wish many governments would come to reason as one. I guess it takes more than a Babe Ruth to make home runs in government today but Janice your on top. Janice I wish you could speak up at my pardon if it comes about but I believe I’m not left in outfield and have a pretty good handle on that one if a pardon comes about. One can look at this registry in many views but I can tell you its not a divine comedy or who’s playing the one tin soilder in this game.
What are the chances of submitting the results of a DNA search of the CODIS at our own expense? How else to prove we aren’t suspected serial killers only deterred by the registry?
https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet
Why are people being put under Tier 3 based on the faulty Static 99R in the first place? What this essentially means is that a flawed number, instead of the underlying crime, is given the power to put someone in a Tier. I don’t even know where to begin in articulating why the use of the Scam 99R is wrong… on so many levels.
This is ludicrousy.
Would a letter from the California AG’s office (back then, Kamala Harris) that removes a registrant’s requirement to register be of any good use to the cause? An associate of mine was removed from the registry and has the signed letter from the department to prove it. All he asks is that it not be used to render the state to reinstate his registration.
Cite cases? Are you now attorneys? New Person just wrote a book! Get with it
Looking for those similarly affected to attempt a class action injunction to bar address exposure and enhanced reporting requirements of the tiered registry for those convicted before ML went into effect.
As in Jessica’s law ex post facto was successful in ACLU’s immediate injunction to bar it’s application for residency restrictions to those convicted prior to JL’s application.
My own particulars are 32 year old single crime, will be moved to tier 3. 20 years in same county. No criminal activity previous to conviction and one following conviction for drug possession, no criminal activity for 25 years. Address exposure will ensue, my living arrangement will not stand address exposure. An immediate injunction will be necessary on ex post facto grounds. Any others wish to participate in this very narrow challenge?
Surprising? Are you guys lawyers? Your citing case law? Injunctions? For? It’s all talk. Volunteer?
Since I have been involved with my ordeal in a probational way, and yes I’ve been on Janice’s forum in the past. Most of you have always somehow wanted to included your pride or this data base computer theory. Why? Should we all let a computer speak for our conscious our view points or our understandings or our wisdom.
Did we all not get along just as good without a computer. If a computer know’s all the answers than Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf in this controversial issue.
I’m not ivy league person and I doubt if anyone on here is but we all have feelings or does a computer know the data of that or the emotions. While Tim seems to bring up things of a database prospective we are all not machines. Someone brought up the idea are we are all not lawyers. While I’m sure many value view’s about the computer but where we all better off without computers or does the postman always ring twice in one’s call of duty.
Sure nothing wrong with how you use but its how one can abuse. Governents abuse things everyday even one’s tongue or mouth can get out of line but I’m sure we all have principal, and we all have our ups and downs in daily life on many issues, and yes we all can voice out to the people. Sure when one is considering a vocation they must chose it wisely.
Myself I should of went in to parole board pardons end of the criminal justice field as their are many that need pardons in this United States and that does show some type of compassion. Its either united we stand or divided we fall and it seems like the sex ordeal has many pitfalls to clean up for true justice values. Sure obeying masters is good but when a master overruns another whos’ principal are they using? Two wrongs don’t make a right.
@USA – What on earth is wrong with you? Do you enjoy attacking others who are trying to engage in meaningful dialogue? When you’re not attacking others your other favorite pastime appears to be touting your own expungement and that you are apparently above everyone else who visits this forum. Perhaps it might be a good time to seek your amusement elsewhere?
Question: I was convicted of 2 rapes 21 years ago, indecent exposure 14 years ago and a child porn charge like 6 years ago. Does anyone know what tier I’ll be on?
Jax, your absolutely correct! I lost my law license secondary to my plea and now practice as a paralegal. I highly recommend not taking any legal advice from this jail house repeat offenders. I’ve read some of their case law quotes and it’s both very disturbing and misleading. I highly advise those of you trying to mislead others to stop now, unless your a licensed attorney. I’ve been reading this blog for years and it’s very apparent you guys need support. I’ve read input from other readers and many of you will lash out at others like it’s something personal? Many of you write these page length comments? You clearly have a need to control and criticize those with alternative and many times correct comments. It’s time to realize (I worked over 20 plus years with numerous defendants) the world doesn’t revolve around you and you can’t control others! Change or believe me, you will return back to the slammer!
I see on the form it says you may apply to be removed if you were convicted in a California State court. So all federal and out of state cases are not allowed to apply? The law does not say that. So where did that come from? They need to fix that on the form.
Joe ~ You absolutely nailed it, and your reasoning is spot on. I couldn’t have summed it up better.