The Kansas Supreme Court ruled Friday that a man’s municipal conviction for sexual battery requires him to register as a sex offender.
The 5-2 decision comes in the case of a man, who was convicted in 2018 of sexual battery in violation of the Shawnee municipal code.
At issue was whether he was required to register as a sex offender under the Kansas Offender Registration Act. The Supreme Court ruled that he did, finding that the Shawnee ordinance is identical to the state statute.
Justices Melissa Standridge and Eric Rosen dissented, arguing the Legislature did not intend for the statute to apply to municipal prosecutions.
According to the ruling, he drove a taxi late at night with two female passengers. After dropping off the first one in Overland Park, he started toward Shawnee with the other, who had moved to the front seat at his request.
During the drive, Adem repeatedly asked her to go to a bar with him. She refused. He pulled the car over and three times tried to embrace her. He also rubbed her forearm and thigh in “a sexual nature.” She reported the incident to police the next morning.
I can see this case going to the next level. Normally, states are given the presumptive self determination where Fed courts defer supremacy to the SC of each state to determine the interpretation of their own state law. But IMO, because the KSSC has ruled already, any flaw in the ruling( the minority pointed to one) could be the basis of a fed challenge. Was the defense made aware of the potential of state sex offender registration duty at the time of plea in city court? If not there IS an issue! Again I cite Padilla v Kentucky.
And further thoughts on Padilla..