NEW: (# Failure to Register Technicality
NEW: Failure to Register a Sex Offense???
CAUTION: SORNA EFFECTIVE even if state has not enacted it
Plea Bargains: Santabello v New York
Blog also contains "Unfavorable" and "Informational" decisions and relevant news articles. All can be useful in framing arguments for new court actions. (i.e., avoid pitfalls or inform courts.) Or refuting charges, check facts of cases v yours.
Leagle is our main court decision resource.
Find State decisions by the Federal Circuit a State is in.

CAUTION: Decisions are meant to be educational.
For "Personal Life Decisions" consult with a lawyer.

In the Matter of Mitchell Borden

11-1-2011 North Carolina:

In the Matter of Mitchell Borden

The State of North Carolina (“the State”) appeals from an order terminating Mitchell Borden’s (“Petitioner”) sex offender registration requirement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-208.12A (2009). We must determine whether the term “initial county registration” as provided in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-208.12A(a) means the date of initial county registration in North Carolina or in any jurisdiction. Because “initial county registration” means the date of initial county registration in North Carolina, and Petitioner has not been registered as a sex offender in North Carolina for at least ten years, we reverse the trial court’s order.

In this case, the trial court incorrectly interpreted “initial county registration” to mean “initial county registration in any jurisdiction.” While Petitioner had been registered as a sex offender in Kentucky for at least ten years, the record shows he was not registered in North Carolina for at least ten years.4 Thus, the trial court erred when it terminated Petitioner’s sex offender registration requirement. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order. REVERSED. Judges GEER and STROUD concur.

Article: Raising Full Faith and Credit Clause question: Sex offenders and stun guns

No comments: