CA DOJ to Send Notices to Those Convicted of Attempted Offenses

Source: ACSOL

The California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) will send notices to those convicted of an attempted offense regarding the lowering of their tier assignment, according to a message received from that agency.  The notices will be mailed to the homes of those who are affected by this change.

CA DOJ sent an email message yesterday to an attorney who requested in June 2024 a new tier assignment for an individual convicted of an attempted offense.  This request was made after a court issued a decision in March 2024 ordering CA DOJ to stop assigning individuals convicted of an attempted offense to the same tier as those convicted of a completed offense.

According to the email from CA DOJ, “sex offender registrants who are affected by the judgment will be notified through mail at the registrant’s address.”  The email message did not include a statement regarding when the notices would be mailed.

It is unfortunate that the California Department of Justice continues to delay its implementation of a court order requiring them to lower the tiers of those convicted of an attempted offense,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “The agency’s delay will continue to block many individuals from filing a petition for removal from the registry.”

The original lawsuit regarding this issue was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on June 30, 2022.  During the litigation, CA DOJ took the position that the Tiered Registry Law required individuals convicted of an attempted offense to be assigned to the same tier as those convicted of a completed offense.  The court ultimately disagreed with that position and issued its decision on March 25, 2024.  

More than five months later, CA DOJ has failed to comply with this court order.  Further delays could result in new litigation. 

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.  
 

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

We have seen over and over and over again that these people do not play by the rules! They are motivated by blind hatred. An incremental approach to this foolishness of sex offense registry simply gives it teeth. It gives it credibility when none should be granted! It is like playing footsy with the devil, in my opinion.
One does not pussyfoot around with cancer. One excises it! But having said that, I have to say that I think that Janice Bellucci is a fine and Noble warrior on our behalf. Thank you for doing what you do!

Thank you for doing this work! I look forward to reading this notice from the DOJ. I am not optimistic about my own case but we’ll see what they say.

This is excellent news!!
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

(At the same time, it is frustrating that many of the individuals affected by this action, may not see this information or receive the letter from California DOJ – I am skeptical that their efforts will be very wholehearted. And I know that many Registrants wish to simply avoid & ignore any reminder of their status.
Nonetheless, I remain hopeful that MANY current Registrants will soon successfully apply for removal from the California Registry. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻)

I know litigation and costing the gov’t large sums of money. What if one or more registrants with attempted crimes could have been relieved from the registry during this delay? Then that means they were wrongfully identified as registrants. There was a case where the registry was deemed punishment for a convict who wasn’t convicted of a sex crime. Technically, those with attempted convictions who could have been off the registry if the had DOJ promptly implemented the court’s decision. There could be a class action about the delayed justice!

Well, that’s just a hopeful thought, but it would be great to win a lawsuit that forces DOJ to expedite court orders in fear of losing millions.

What’s attempted is that like those sting operations?
The messed up part is people convicted of 288.2 are also attempted but unfortunately they will remain lifetime. it’s like two steps forward two steps back

Where can I see a list of PC codes that make up “intent crimes?”