UT: ‘Conviction’ aside, Utah Supreme Court says sex offender must register

Admin

The Utah Supreme Court has ruled a man must register as a sex offender, despite his conviction ultimately being set aside in another state. Full Article

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.  
 

14 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Not surprising.

Same thing would happen in Texas.

Any type of deferred or set aside conviction still counts toward registration if you plead guilty or no contest. That was in Sorna also and was unconstitionally added by the attorney General I believe as that violates Seperation of Powers.

In Packingham, the SCOTUS Justices found it “troubling” that any restrictions continue after the court decided duration of government supervision ends. Seems like they should be extra troubled by it continuing after that time and without even a conviction. It makes judges useless pawns and plea deals moot. Yet, we cant get the right cases in front of them to fix this.

0
Reply
View Replies (4)

More B.S ! Its so sad to think these little pecker heads get away with this kind of stuff all the time. Need a million reg. march ! On the front of their capital door steps .

0
Reply

It seems to me this guy is fighting in the wrong jurisdiction. The story says he was required to register in ID despite the conviction being set aside. Why didn’t he fight it there? As the UT SC states, UT requires registration if required to register in another jurisdiction, which is exactly the case here.

The guy himself even gets this, rendering the other argument moot.
*****
Mr. H____ concedes that he qualifies as an offender under the statute, because he required to register in another state[.]
*****
So, even if UT said, “you’re right, dude, you’re not an offender in UT’s eyes,” he’s *still* need to register with UT because of the ID requirement. He’s fighting the wrong fight, in the wrong State.

0
Reply
View Replies (6)

More freedoms as a nomads in the US than a resident. Not sure what the loop holes in the laws are available on this but if one would get an out of country driver’s license driving in the USA would still be aloud. Buy and register a mini van under a friend or family member’s name with you listed as a driver “bam!” freedom to live and travel. Trick is know days required to register in each state travelled and never violate that timeline. Talking with law enforcement on how those time restrictions are applied helps…ie. I chatted with a Nevada deputy sheriff that told me the requirement is 48 hours but it is applied by jurisdiction. If the jurisdiction is city PD or county sheriff’s…just stay under 48 hours within individual jurisdictions. In Arizona and New Mexico it’s 10 days. Always do your research and check with legal counsel before travelling.

0
Reply