CASOMB Committee Recommends Delayed Consideration of Off-Ramp for CA Tier 3

The Tiered Registry Committee of the California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) met today in order to continue its discussions of proposed changes to the Tiered Registry Law. During that meeting, the committee decided to delay consideration regarding the creation of an off-ramp for those assigned to Tier 3 for an indefinite period of time.  The committee’s decision is expected to be approved by CASOMB during its next meeting on Nov. 16.

In prior meetings, both the committee and CASOMB initially discussed the creation of an off-ramp that would allow those assigned to Tier 3 to petition for removal from the registry after registering for 30 years provided that they had not re-offended.  In last month’s meeting, CASOMB asked the committee to identify possible exclusions to the off-ramp such as individuals designated as a sexually violent predator.

According to remarks made during today’s committee meeting, additional research is required in order to identify all proposed exclusions from the Tier 3 off-ramp.  It is the committee’s position that the research cannot be accomplished before CASOMB presents its recommendations to the legislature later this year.

CASOMB has already voted in support of three significant changes to the Tiered Registry Law.  First, the tier assignment for all individuals convicted of an offense involving non-production of child pornography should be reduced from Tier 3 to Tier 1.  Second, the tier assignment for all individuals convicted of PC 288(c) should be reduced from Tier 3 to Tier 2.  Third, the tier assignment for all individuals convicted of PC 288.2, 288.3 and 288.4 should be reduced from Tier 3 to a lower tier.

CASOMB is expected to send its recommendations regarding the proposed changes to the state legislature later this year.  The legislature created CASOMB for the purpose of making recommendations regarding issues related to registrants.  The legislature, however, is not required to accept CASOMB’s recommendations.

Because the year 2024 is a Presidential election year, it is unlikely that the legislature will pass a law adopting CASOMB’s recommendations in that year.  It is, however, more likely that the legislature will adopt CASOMB’s recommendations in the year 2025 and if it does so, the changes are likely to take effect in the year 2026. 

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

27 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I thought CP was recommended to tier 1?

I knew they would punt on this. More “after the election season” excuses and “our hands are tired” meandering.

You are correct, Matthew. CASOMB has recommended reduction of felony CP offenses not involving production from Tier 3 to Tier 1. I apologize for that error.

Will the updated legislation read something like “if you have violated such and such as a felony” just like 311.11(a) where they are getting tier reductions from 3-1 already. Or will it still be penal code base for 288.2, 288.3, 288.4?

From the article: “According to remarks made during today’s committee meeting, additional research is required in order to identify all proposed exclusions from the Tier 3 off-ramp. It is the committee’s position that the research cannot be accomplished before CASOMB presents its recommendations to the legislature later this year.

CASOMB has been established over a decade ago and they have had no extensive research done on the registrant population? Dr. Karl Hanson already has done research on maximum “containment monitoring” to be 17 years.

These criminal governments are really just too dumb.

I’m not Registered in CA so their crimes don’t affect me. But I don’t really care about any “off ramp” from the Registries. I mean, I really don’t give a f*ck. It only took a couple of years of being listed to fully radicalize me. 2 years is way too long. 10 years is ridiculous. 20 is idiotic. It’s all criminal.

The criminal regimes can all keep me Registered and I’ll continue to ensure that helps no one. I will continue to ensure it causes as much widespread harm as possible. I’ve been hurting people for decades. The Registries ensure that will continue.

The criminals can’t stop the war. They aren’t smart or strong enough to do it. So the war will continue and they have no choice.

I’ve lost all hope. Nothing will change.

Just remember folks, this is the “land of the free” not some backwards highly authoritative country like China or North Korea…….

What is so dam difficult about figuring out an off ramp for tier three offenders ? We all know which offenders that should continued to be monitored! Dam , even those individuals that need to be monitored know they should be monitored! They would agree too ! It’s not difficult to differentiate those whom are eligible and those whom aren’t! Again , those individuals that have COR’S should be the first individuals that should be given the opportunity to petition for removal! That is a NO brainer! Second, then those on tier three that have been on the hit list more than 17 years and have not reoffended to date . Bottom line , …[Note: please, lets not throw anyone under the bus here, no exceptions]… It’s not difficult. I’m not sure how much ACSOL is pushing this tier three off ramp but we need a different strategy or way to approach this hot topic balls to the wall . Please. If there are any suggestions from the individuals whom are affected by this , please chime in with comments . We need to speck up . I know you are pissed but remember to keep your comments respectful but let your thoughts be heard . Stay strong !

Wow! Some of the stuff being said is just nuts! Not the legitimate grievances, but the nuts stuff. You know who you are. Or, maybe you don’t. We were all lifers before the tiered registry and now some of us are getting a break and some of haven’t – yet. Hopefully, one day, it’ll be the rest of our turns to get a break. Until then, I’m keeping my head down, and keeping as low a profile as possible. But that’s just me.

Last edited 8 months ago by Just me

Regardless of the supreme court ruling its blatantly obvious retroactive application (ex post facto} of the registry is the biggest violation of the constitution since it was written. The tyrants who pushed this law have taken the first big chip out of the constitution which has” broken the ice ” to keep chipping away. The die has been cast and the fools don’t even know what they have done –squandered the american experiment