From Bill Dobbs: 4th Circuit LOSS
Doe v. Settle
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Case No. 20-1951
Opinion and decision filed Jan. 28, 2021
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/201951.P.pdf
Another victory for endless punishment.
So while Doe may have felt lucky to only be charged with indecent liberties, given the potential for a lower prison sentence, that plea ended up condemning him to worse treatment on the registry. Because of that oddity, Doe will spend the rest of his life on Virginia’s sex-offender registry with no hope for relief.
And whatever else they may be, Virginia’s sex-offender registry and its narrow Romeo-and-Juliet provision are constitutional. Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Bloomberg | Jan. 28, 2022
Virginia’s Sex Offender Registry Romeo-and-Juliet Clause Upheld
- More serious crime defendant can be removed from registry
- Doesn’t violate equal protection, isn’t cruel, unusual
A 30-year-old man, who as an 18-year-old was caught having sex with his 14-year-old girlfriend and pleaded guilty to taking indecent liberties with a minor, must stay on Virginia’s sex offender registry, the Fourth Circuit said Friday.
John Doe was facing the higher class felony of having “carnal knowledge of child” but pleaded to the lesser offense to get a shorter prison sentence.
Had Doe pleaded guilty to the carnal knowledge offense, he could’ve petitioned to be removed from the registry after five years under the law’s Romeo-and-Juliet provision, which is intended to ameliorate sex offenders registry requirements for teenagers …
To read the full article log in.
Headline had me scared til I realized I’ve no idea what the loss was.
Much citing of Smith v Doe. The VA registry is not punishment because it is not substantially different from the Alaska registry at issue in Smith v Doe in 2003. The 4th Circuit is effectively aligning with the 5th and 10th on this question, rather than the 6th (the good Does v Snyder).
That’s what I took away from this ruling that would constitute persuasive authority in our circuit. But I realize our Legal Committee could do an infinitely better job of explaining the implications.
A lot else in the ruling, including the first 22 pages of it, seemed narrow. And I don’t know whether an under-seal case from their circuit will ever constitute persuasive authority in ours.
I should clarify, btw, what courts mean when they rule that a registry is “not punishment.” Courts are NOT necessarily ruling that a registry doesn’t impose hardships. Of course they do! (Price Club analogies notwithstanding). But often, courts are simply arguing that the registry passes a balancing test. They’re wrong on that, too, of course, but our Ex Post Facto counsel understand the difference.
So what is the loss here? Everyone in Fl is on lifetime. I don’t get it.
I think the loss here is that another Fed circuit has ruled a registry to be not-punishment.
If I’ve read this correctly.
So then, the guy plead guilty to a lesser charge to get a shorter prison sentence, but because the crime he plead guilty to wasn’t covered by the Romeo-and-Juliet law, he can’t petition to get off the registry. The “crime” was the same either way, but the ultimate punishment is harsher. Makes sense. In hindsight, maybe he should have taken the longer prison sentence.
Sounds like he had a bad defense attorney. Lawyers tend to have very narrow vision, and chalk it up as a win if they can arrange a plea to a lesser offense, i.e. one with a shorter sentence. Even though a lawyer is not required to investigate and explain all the collateral effects of taking a plea, the registry is so heinous that it should always be made clear to a client.
Because the registry is “merely” a collateral consequence of a conviction, the guy probably has no grounds for an ineffective assistance of counsel argument. Oddly, it is quite possible for an attorney to render legally effective assistance and incompetent assistance at the same time.
Veritas.
When I was in high school it was common for freshman and seniors to date. I don’t know if they were having sex, but I wouldn’t be surprised when two hormonal teens are together. Do these judges remember what being a teen was like or have they always been pure up high on their pedestal? Shouldn’t be forced to register for being horny.