CA Dept. of Justice Agrees to Reduce Some Tier Assignments

Source: ACSOL

The California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) has agreed to reduce tier assignments for individuals convicted of an attempted offense.  That agreement has been formalized in an order issued by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge this week.

This is a significant victory for those convicted of an attempted offense,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “In the past, CA DOJ assigned those people to the same tier as if they had completed their offense.  As a result, thousands of registrants became ineligible to petition for removal from the registry.”

This agreement is in settlement of a case filed against the state agency in June 2022.  Initially, CA DOJ refused to reduce tier assignments for those convicted of an attempted offense although sentencing for an attempted offense is significantly less severe than a completed offense.

In an attempt to resolve the case before trial, both parties filed motions for summary judgment in early 2023.  The court, however, denied both motions for summary judgment in April 2023.

Although the court denied the motions for summary judgment, the court stated  in its decision that it agreed with plaintiffs that convictions for an attempted offense should not be assigned to the same tier as a completed offense.  The only reason the court denied plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion is that the tier assignment of one of the two plaintiffs would not change because he was convicted of an additional offense which requires assignment to Tier 3.  Assignment to Tier 3 in most cases means an individual is not eligible to petition for removal.  

Because of this statement in the court’s decision, CA DOJ entered into settlement negotiations with the plaintiffs.  Settlement of the case was reached in early March and the parties reported the terms of the settlement to the court about 10 days ago.

The court order requires CA DOJ to “amend its policy regarding the tiering of convictions for attempt crimes” for all individuals convicted of an attempted offense.  The court order also specifies that CA DOJ must reassign of the two plaintiffs from Tier 3 to Tier 1.

Due to this week’s court order, the trial in this case has been canceled.  

Download the judgement:

Judgment – March 2024

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

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

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. 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.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. 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.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. 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.
  22. 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.  
 

63 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wonderful news! More justice for Californians!

Does this mean attempted offenses will now be tier 1? How soon can we apply for relief?

Excellent news! Chipping away!

There you guys go Tier 3 off ramp, I know a lot people happy as Hell right now 🎉

Awesome!

Now for something similar to get misdemeanors moved out of Tier 3, whether by original conviction or 17b reduction. It’s equally as ridiculous to include those individuals in the “most dangerous” category.

Do we know how exactly they will reassign attempted offenses?

If I’m in Tier 2 for attempt 288(a) will I be moved to Tier 1 and eligible to petition for removal?

Brick by brick…………

Just read through the final judgement and it seems like the entire argument and the conclusion fell on whether or not the defendant was able to get 1203.4, with emphases being that “attempts are not as bad as other stuff in order to deny 1203.4 via 1203.4 (b)”. So, if that’s really the case, than shouldn’t really anyone that qualified for 1203.4 be Tier 1 since none of those people were disqualified under 1203.4 (b)? I know they used this to finagle “attempts” in contrast to “completed” offenses, but the overall deal with that subsection is crimes that are considered serious enough to exclude them from 1203.4 in general.

This ruling really does read to me like offenses that are “minor” enough to warrant a 1203.4 dismissal aren’t bad enough to now be considered Tier 3 or 2 .

Nor does the exclusion of attempts from the section 1203.4, subdivision (b) exception result in absurd consequences. To the 9 contrary, attempted crimes regularly are punished less severely than completed crimes.(§ 664 [establishing sentences for attempts at one-half the • length of those for the completed crime].) The Legislature reasonably could have concluded that perpetrators of attempted sex offenses should have the opportunity to expunge their records, while those who completed certain sex offenses should not. Accordingly, we conclude that the Legislature intended to exclude attempts from the section 1203.4, subdivision (b) exception.  

If something isn’t serious enough to prohibit granting of 1203.4, then how can it be concluded that Tier 3 is still appropriate? If legislatures thought something was serious enough to exclude a person from 1203.4, they would’ve amended 1203.4(b) to include any offenses they serious enough to register as Tier 2 and Tier 3.

I’ve been meditating on the concept of hopelessness quite a bit lately, but now I think I will reverse course.

Once again ACSOL has given me reason to find hope. To find it, and hold on to it, and believe it is real. Hope is the most valuable commodity a human being can have, even more so than time. Without hope, time has no value.

There is a word for this… time without hope…it is Hell… for that is what Hell is. An eternity of time…all made less than valueless…made torture.

ACSOL: Once again you bring hope to the hopeless… and there is no greater gift, no finer act, no nobler deed, no…clearer expression of that which can only be called Devine.

Practitioners of Faith believe that God works through people…perhaps, they are right?

Time without hope is Hell, and you are forging a path out…

As always, may all you hold to be good and true bless you and keep you, well.

FORGE ON!

Still waiting to hear whether former California residents can be granted relief from registration if they qualify and served their Tier 1 & 2 designed times in registration

Several people have asked how they will know that their tier has been reassigned. Because this court’s decision is very new, no formal process has yet been identified. Having said that, I would go to the office where I register and ask for a Form 8050, Proof of Current Registration, because that form includes a person’s tier assignment. If you obtain your Form 8050 and it does not say you are assigned to Tier 1, please contact me at jmbellucci@aol.com. Thank you.

Congrats Janice on such a big WIN against the DOJ…only ones who really appreciate this, of course, are many that are conv of Attempted PC. So even if they were on 3 or 2 now a Level ONE, hopefully past a decade, they are ready alk to petition in CA Courts with this change.

Congrats, keep up the fairness fight and of course whittling dn to offrampfor L-3s

Is 288.4 considered an attempted offense?

This is amazing! Now if only this could happen in other states as well!!!

We need this in NYS, this is long overdue!!!

Thank you for advocating for us.

a glimmer of hope…..just hoping beyond hope, that we see similar news for PC311

what is an ‘attemped offense?’ Is it an actual legal thing or something where there was no victim?

Would my 288.2(a)(1) be an attempt if it was in a police sting where there was never any victim?

Here’s another logical fallacy to tier assignments: The Static-99R states if someone has not sexually reoffended in 15 to 17 years after one has been offense-free in the community, then one is not likely to reoffend any more than a person who never committed a sex offense.

Why do people assigned to Tier 3, based on “static risk,” need to wait 20 years, at minimum? Seems to me the minimum registration requirement should be set at 15 to 17 years.

This is life changing for a dear friend of mine. Janice is doing amazing work.

What about people convicted of felony attempt 664/288.2(b), even with a 17(b) reduction and being placed in tier 1 by the DOJ, 17(e) still won’t allow a judge to relieve he/she of their duty to register. people vs kennedy & people vs manzoor.

Last edited 12 days ago by I’m not a robot

I wonder if this means all attempted offenses would be classified as tier 1?

This is outrageous. So those Micky Mouse stings performed by Perverted Justice and aired on “To Catch a Predator” were attempts not equal to completed offenses. Big fricking DOH! One did not have to be charged with this to be outraged about the balloon headed arrogance of Xavier Von Erck (born Philip John Eide) and Chris Hansen. The only case I followed closely was that of Dr. Wolin, the cancer doctor who did more to save children than the pile of due series could dream of ever accomplishing. And I quiver with anger now because of knowing Dr. Wolin had his medical license revoked and then hanged himself 1/6/2021. He might have petitioned for removal had the law been more honest – leaving some semblance of hope instead of mired by legal moral panic.