ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: September 12 [recording uploaded] – Details / Recordings
Remaining 2020 meetings will be Nov 21 and Dec 19

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

2020 ACSOL Conference – ONLINE October 10-11
More Info and Sign-Up

General News

CA: Legislature Passes Bill that Delays Submission of Some Tiered Registry Petitions

The California legislature has passed a bill, Senate Bill 118, that modifies some provisions of the Tiered Registry Law set to take effect next year. The Governor signed the bill into law on August 6, 2020.

“The provision within Senate Bill 118 that will affect the greatest number of people can be found in Section 11 which requires that registrants must wait to file their petition after their next birthday following July 1, 2021,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “As a result, anyone whose birthday is January 1 through June 30 will not be able to file their petition until the month of their birthday in 2022.”

This provision of Senate Bill 118 was originally a provision in Assembly Bill 88 which is no longer viable.

In addition to the birthday provision, Senate Bill 118 adds a requirement that registering law enforcement agencies must notify the California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) when they receive a petition. Further, the bill requires courts to notify CA DOJ when they grant or deny a petition.

Finally, Senate Bill 118 clarifies when an individual assigned to Tier 2 may file a petition after only 10 years as well as when an individual assigned to Tier 3 may file a petition after 20 years.

Senate Bill 118 – Aug 2020

Join the discussion

  1. Bay Area Resident

    Clarification is always good!

    I would really wish to see a path for people who have had cases dismissed via 1203.4 get off the registry. As well as an “off ramp” every one.

    Rome wasn’t built in a day, as they say. Let’s keep fighting!

    • AERO1

      Im lost for word’s SMH 🤔

      GOOD LUCK

    • New Person

      It is interesting that Tier 2 and Tier 3 possesses the capacity to petition earlier than their initial designation, but nothing for Tier 1’s.

      PC 1203.4 used to be an “off-ramp” to de-register via Kelly v Municpal of 1958. Then in the 2000s (maybe late 1990s), newer PC 290 law were enacted. Lost in all this was the amending the California Constitution to include the ‘right to privacy’ in 1972, which is the right to be left alone. Privacy became an inalienable right to “pursue and obtain privacy”. 1203.4 states specifically, “the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant.” This means your accusation or information against you no longer exists; it cannot be disseminated. The 1972 amendment specifically protects ‘the right to be left alone’ with verbiage of “pursue and obtain privacy” which 1203.4 perfectly aligns for a defendant to regain Constitutional privacy.

      From a laymen’s perspective, “right to pursue and obtain privacy (be left alone)” could have several interpretations, which includes losing it and regaining it. Since Kelly v Municipal allowed one to de-register between 1958 – 2000s, there was no scientific reason to extend it from probationary period to a minimum of a 10-year wait. 2003 Smith v Doe used false facts, which Dr Ira and Tara Ellman revealed in there academic report. CASOMB has reported under 1% recidivism for two consecutive years once Failure to Register was removed from the grouping (when it was reported to us on ACSOL). Thus, the compelling reason to keep your privacy revoked seems cruel and unusual penalty that which the constitution is supposed to protect and is reiterated to be regained via 1203.4.

      While everyone is focused on punishment, why isn’t 1203.4’s “the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant” not ever addressed as a direct conflict with today’s registry that disseminates the accusation as current? Why doesn’t it fall into “right to pursue and obtain privacy” CA constitutional protections? Considering that there are sex offenses that cannot qualify for 1203.4, it seems malice to negate this benefit from registrants who do qualify for 1203.4.

      Also, it devalues successfully completing probation. In court, I witness so many violating their probationary terms. Why is there a double standard when it comes to registrants who do qualify for 1203.4?

      == Tier 2 Qualification for 10 year petition ==
      A person required to register as a tier two offender, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 290, may petition the superior court for termination from the registry after 10 years from release from custody on the registerable offense if all of the following apply:
      … (A) the registerable offense involved no more than one victim 14 to 17 years of age, inclusive;
      … (B) the offender was under 21 years of age at the time of the offense;
      … (C) the registerable offense is not specified in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5, except subdivision (a) of Section 288; and
      … (D) the registerable offense is not specified in Section 236.1.

      A tier two offender described in paragraph (1) may file a petition with the superior court for termination from the registry only if the person has not been convicted of a new offense requiring sex offender registration or an offense described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 since the person was released from custody on the offense requiring registration pursuant to Section 290, and has registered for 10 years pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 290.

      == Tier 3 Qualification for 20 year petition ==
      A person required to register as a tier three offender based solely on the person’s risk level, pursuant to subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) of Section 290, may petition the court for termination from the registry after 20 years from release from custody on the registerable offense, if the person
      … (A) has not been convicted of a new offense requiring sex offender registration or an offense described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 since the person was released from custody on the offense requiring
      registration pursuant to Section 290, and
      … (B) has registered for 20 years pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 290; except that a person required to register for a conviction pursuant to Section 288 or an offense listed in subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7 who is a tier three offender based on the person’s risk level, pursuant to subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) of Section 290, shall not be permitted to petition for removal from the registry.

      The court shall determine whether community safety would be significantly enhanced by requiring continued registration and may consider the following factors:
      … whether the victim was a stranger (known less than 24 hours) at the time of the offense;
      … the nature of the registerable offense, including whether the offender took advantage of a position of trust; criminal and relevant noncriminal behavior before and after the conviction for the registerable offense;
      … whether the offender has successfully completed a Sex Offender Management Board-certified sex offender treatment program;
      … whether the offender initiated a relationship for the purpose of facilitating the offense;
      … and the person’s current risk of sexual or violent reoffense, including the person’s risk levels on SARATSO static, dynamic, and violence risk assessment instruments, if known.

      If the petition is denied, the person may not re-petition for termination for at least three years.

      • Political Prisoner

        So if you are a tier 2 and were over 21 when the offence took place this does not apply to you and you are SOL

    • BA

      Does this mean all the people who are not allowed to get relief from registry in July 2021, will be on the open website as of Jan.1, 2022 ? Also is this all tiers, as normally I would get off the registry in july 2021 or around there and have never had my picture on the open website.

  2. KM in SoCal

    So, if I understand this CP now has an off ramp sort of? How does this square with the new crap the feds are trying?

  3. New Person

    Whoa… There’s a lot to take in from the pdf.

    I saw this in the bill:

    *** Start of excerpt ***
    SEC. 16. Section 1203.425 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

    1203.425. (a) (1)
    (A) Commencing July 1, 2022, and subject to an appropriation in the annual Budget Act, on a monthly basis, the Department of Justice shall review the records in the statewide criminal justice databases, and based on information in the state summary criminal history repository and the Supervised Release File, shall identify persons with convictions that meet the criteria set forth in subparagraph (B) and are eligible for automatic conviction record relief.

    (B) A person is eligible for automatic conviction relief pursuant to this section if they meet all of the following conditions:
    … (i) The person is not required to register pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.
    … (ii) The person does not have an active record for local, state, or federal supervision in the Supervised Release File.
    … (iii) Based upon the information available in the department’s record, including disposition dates and sentencing terms, it does not appear that the person is currently serving a sentence for an offense and there is no indication of pending criminal charges.
    … (iv) Except as otherwise provided in subclause (III) of clause (v), there is no indication that the conviction resulted in a sentence of incarceration in the state prison.
    … (v) The conviction occurred on or after January 1, 2021, and meets either of the following criteria:
    …….. (I) The defendant was sentenced to probation and, based upon the disposition date and the term of probation specified in the department’s records, appears to have completed their term of probation without
    revocation.
    …….. (II) The defendant was convicted of an infraction or misdemeanor, was not granted probation, and, based upon the disposition date and the term specified in the department’s records, the defendant appears to have completed their sentence, and at least one calendar year has elapsed since the date of judgment.
    *** End of excerpt ***

    Whoaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!

    This is for a monthly review to grant automatic conviction relief? Does this remove the ability to petition for 1203.4 automatic case dismissal?

    I found my answer reading further down. (This is really confusing.)

    *** Start of Excerpt ***
    1203.425. (b) (7)
    A person denied relief pursuant to this section may continue to be eligible for relief pursuant to Section 1203.4 or 1203.4a. If the court subsequently grants relief pursuant to one of those sections, the court shall
    furnish a disposition report to the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 13151, stating that relief was granted pursuant to the applicable section, and the department shall grant relief pursuant to that section.
    *** End of Excerpt ***

    This means registrants have to file a petition for 1203.4 if you were given probation. I don’t comprehend the segregation of this bill to omit registrants from the automatic process? It forces registrants to enter the court house as well as possibly hiring lawyers. It sure feels like legal segregation. The registry was supposed to only make one available for a lineup, but now it’s used to treat us as separate entities that require different rules.

    The silver lining here is that the DA or probation cannot deny you your 1203.4 petition as this bill only looks at the automatic process where the DA or probation can deny it due to public safety. Once you fulfill all 1203.4 requirements successfully, then you automatically earn the ‘expungement’. At least, that’s how I read the bill.

    • Dph

      yes, I would hire a crim atty to decipher and be an actuator to see if Even you might be eligible for the 20.yr or for that matter any tier for filing due to this new bill passing. MNy 68 pgs to be combed through with a fine pick comb not to miss anything. This has been added to not allow an RC to due themselves or/and slow dn filings DOJ was going to be notified no matter, especially if granted for removal!

  4. JC

    Question: I was under the impression that some on Tier 2 will have to register for 20yrs but can request to be taken off of the public registry after 10 years, is this correct? Also, will this bill limit his ability to make this request an we’ll have to wait until after July 1,2022? My husband’s birthday is before 7/1/2021 and was caught up in a sting, already had record expunged. We were hoping we could petition tobe taken off of the public registry as soon as the law passed while we wait for him to be able to be taken off completely.

    • w

      The stings are the real reason why they pushed for the delay I’m sure, just trying to drive up “recidivism” numbers artificially. That’s why it’s best to go no-tech as much as possible.

      The covid19 disruption was felt in every industry, especially the sex offender industry. They didn’t get their glorious “operation broken heart” this year so now they’re pivoting. Any stories they can rack up to keep the fire spreading, which is why now more than ever people need to be like mice. Which kinda sucks because most are ready to start pouncing. Don’t accept any texts or calls from ANYONE unknown. Don’t respond to text surveys, random picture messages, or “account” notices. Especially those assuming you are someone else like you got an old number.

      A little sacrifice now will keep them from getting what they want, which is again to protect their rso industry.

  5. jm

    So will teir 1 appear on the megan’s site on 1/1/2022. I fall under the January 1st-June birthday so won’t be able to petition until 2022.

    • SR

      All T1 are kept off the public sight EXCEPT if you have 647.6. This puts you on the oublic list with your postal code but no address.

      Personally, I dont understand this half measure. Hows putting someone on the list without an address helps at all to keep people safe? (I dont think any public info keeps people safe, but im curious about their rational regarding this half measure. It feels a lot more of a “screw you! We’re going to do just enough to screw you over!)

      • CP

        What is a 647.6?

        • w

          It’s the crooked hand of Ramses himself. It’s how scum district attorneys make something out of nothing. It’s how they can get you for a “ghost touch”, an offense that didnt happen to a person who can lie about it. And may have never even existed. A “touch” offense that can still qualify as a sex offense, and can be tried as a wobbler (misdemeanor or felony). Prosecutorial limbo if you will.

      • KR

        I believed misdemeanor 647.6 is excluded from public listing when they start publishing on Jan 2022. This is what I was advised on from a lawyer. Unless something changed and also a misdemeanor 647.6 would be assigned to Tier 1.

        • SR @ KR

          It’s the exact opposite, actually. Right now 647.6 are excluded from public registry. But come 2022, 647.6 will be specifically included on the public registry because that’s what a certain person demanded in order for the tiered registry to pass. You’re correct otherwise that it will be T1 for a one-time offense.

  6. CA

    So for clarification: if your birthday is in November, you can still do your petition for removal after July 1 2021?

  7. NewJustice

    Today I had my annual, and I spoke to the officer about getting my tier come January. He informed me that come Jan, I’ll need to go to my local court to Subpoena the court and the city where I register to get the process started. Once the court contacts the city, they will then send out the information needed for the court to make designation of my tier. He said that process can take up to 60 days depending on how many people issue subpoenas. My case will be out of Pomona but my city is La Verne, has anyone else heard of this procedure?

    • SR

      This doesn’t seem correct unless you’re subject to something weird with your jurisdiction. Whatever office is registering you are supposed to be providing you with your tier assignment starting in January. The only exception is if you don’t have a Static-99 score (usually due to the offense being older than the “test” itself), in which case it may take up to 2 years to get your assignment. Needing to petition your court for it seems to be completely new information.

      • NewJustice

        @SR My crime was in 2004, at the time no Static-99 was required. I spoke to the officer again and the officer said this was the standard procedure for all registrants regardless of any else. I need to subpoena which forces them to get the information to the courts. The officer said this was the information he has told several registrants this year as all have inquired.

  8. Carrie

    My husband was convicted of 288a. He is coming up on 20 years out of prison, the following excerpt says “(B) has registered for 20 years pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 290; except that a person required to register for a conviction pursuant to Section 288”. If I understand this he is not eligible to ever petition to be removed from the registry. Correct?

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.