Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry Act; add to list of offenses requiring registration. (SB1032)

Introduced By

Sen. Bryce Reeves (R-Spotsylvania)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry Act; offenses requiring registration. Adds to the list of offenses that require a person to register on the Sex Offender Registry any similar offense under the common law or codified law in effect at the time of the person's offense to those offenses that already require registration. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Passed

History

DateAction
01/08/2013Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/09/13 13101614D
01/08/2013Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
01/10/2013Impact statement from VCSC (SB1032)
01/25/2013Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (11-Y 0-N 1-A) (see vote tally)
01/25/2013Committee substitute printed 13104583D-S1
01/25/2013Rereferred to Finance
01/28/2013Impact statement from VCSC (SB1032S1)
01/29/2013Reported from Finance (15-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
01/30/2013Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
01/31/2013Read second time
01/31/2013Reading of substitute waived
01/31/2013Committee substitute agreed to 13104583D-S1
01/31/2013Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute SB1032S1
02/01/2013Read third time and passed Senate (38-Y 1-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2013Placed on Calendar
02/06/2013Read first time
02/06/2013Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/06/2013Assigned Courts sub: #1 Criminal
02/08/2013Subcommittee recommends reporting (7-Y 0-N)
02/08/2013Subcommittee recommends referring to Committee on Appropriations
02/11/2013Reported from Courts of Justice (17-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/11/2013Referred to Committee on Appropriations
02/12/2013Assigned App. sub: Public Safety
02/14/2013Subcommittee recommends reporting (7-Y 0-N)
02/15/2013Reported from Appropriations (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/19/2013Read second time
02/20/2013Read third time
02/20/2013Passed House BLOCK VOTE (100-Y 0-N)
02/20/2013VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE (100-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/23/2013Enrolled
02/23/2013Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB1032ER)
02/23/2013Signed by President
02/23/2013Signed by Speaker
02/25/2013Impact statement from VCSC (SB1032ER)
02/27/2013Impact statement from DPB (SB1032ER)
03/25/2013Governor's recommendation received by Senate
04/02/2013Placed on Calendar
04/03/2013G Approved by Governor-Chapter 781 (effective 7/1/13)
04/03/2013Senate concurred in Governor's recommendation (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
04/03/2013House concurred in Governor's recommendation (99-Y 0-N)
04/03/2013VOTE: ADOPTION (99-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
04/03/2013G Governor's recommendation adopted
04/03/2013Reenrolled
04/03/2013Reenrolled bill text (SB1032ER2)
04/03/2013Signed by President as reenrolled
04/03/2013Signed by Speaker as reenrolled
04/03/2013Enacted, Chapter 781 (effective 7/1/13)
04/03/2013G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0781)
04/08/2013Impact statement from VCSC (SB1032ER2)

Video

This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 3 clips in all, totaling 4 minutes.

Comments

stephen writes:

This Bryce Reeves Needs to buy a news Paper, it's not sex offenders Going into schools shooting kids, and it's not sex offenders killing van loads of people by Drunk driving. Why Does he put murders rights to remain in the shadows above the rights of you and your family members to have the tools you need to protect them.

ACLU-VA Criminal Justice, tracking this bill in Photosynthesis, notes:

The ACLU of Virginia opposes this bill that adds unspecified common law crimes to crimes requiring registration and adds them retroactively. The proliferation of offenses requiring registration and the requirements of those who register make the registration law increasingly punitive and threaten constitutional due process rights.

Mary Devoy writes:

Thank you ACLU-VA!

No, no, no, no to SB1032. I’ll say it again, no!

I’ve spoken to two legislative services members and I’ve done a ton of reading on common law v statutory law. There is much more to this bill than the patron’s office is willing to share.

Plus it’s retroactive so citizens would become lifetime registered sex offenders with no due process 5, 10, 15, 20 years since the “offense”. Plus no opportunity to petition to be removed after the fact.

It’s pretty obvious this bill and its companion came from the Administration.

Merging past common law decisions into current statutory law because they are “similar” AND retroactively is shameful.

The word "similar" should NEVER be part of a legal statute! You can’t get more vague than “similar”.

Mary Devoy writes:

Historically, Sex Panics are a fixture in and a fixation of American culture.
When fear is the order of the day, protection is the name of the game.
Sadly the reactive nature of this culture only produces ineffective and counterproductive emotional based policy.

It creates a sense of greater public safety and security based on the erroneous perception of a growing threat.

Sometimes in order to maintain the respect and support of its citizens, government needs to appear more powerful and capable, than it really is.

This is no truer, than when it comes to Sex Offender Policy.

Sex Offender laws, restrictions and increased penalties create an impression that the government is doing something to reduce the number of sex offenses.

This bill and its companion (HB1862) are an attempt to gather up those citizens convicted under 18 and 18.1 of the code because they were reorganized and recodified. But yet the text of this bill doesn’t refer to those sections of code and if that is the goal of these bills the vague verbiage “similar offense” should be removed and the specific offense numbers inserted.

It is also my understanding that with these retroactive bills approximately 143 citizens would be swept up; from common law convictions dating all the way back to 1994. Of those 143 individuals 25-50 of them are currently incarcerated. That means 93 to 118 of them reentered society years ago successfully and have not re-offended. This retroactive lifetime mandate to register denies them due process.

In essence the State wants a “do over” in convicting these people while ignoring their right to due process. The Administration wants to get a second chance at applying a public scarlet letter to these 143 citizens’ subjecting them to a Class 6 Felony if they ever “slip up” in the confusing and ever changing list of restrictions and regulations.

A few years back a current House member who is an attorney publically stated in reference to another retroactive bill that “if he had made a plea agreement that did not include registering as a sex offender and then months or years later the State re-interpreted the law mandating him to register, he would fight it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court”. How does his stance not apply in this case of these two bills?

You can change laws, but you cannot change the past.

Only the law that existed at the time of conviction can be applied judiciously, attempting otherwise violates the public trust and the solemn integrity of our legal system.