SAN DIEGO SEXUAL ASSAULT LAWYER: HERE'S ANOTHER HOFSHEIER WIN
California penal Code sec. 290 requires sex registration for a defendant convicted of Penal Code sec. 288a, oral copulation with a 16-year old girl, but not for Penal Code sec. 261.5, sexual intercourse with that same girl.
In Hofsheier (27 Cal.4th 1185), the California Supremes struck down the mandatory sex registration requirement as violative of equal protection. This case deals with oral copulation of a minor under 16.
This is an easy defense win except for that wacko Manchel (163 Cal.App.4th 1108) case. The Manchel court upheld mandatory sex registration not because of the charge for which the defendant was convicted, but because the defendant's conduct COULD have resulted in a conviction for PC 288(a), which is on the mandatory registration list.
The Court of Appeal in Ranscht (173 Cal.App.4th 1369) correctly explained how ridiculous Manchel is; Manchel upheld mandatory registration because the defendant could have been convicted of an offense requiring registration, even though he wasn't convicted of that offense. This Court of Appeal agrees with Ranscht and strikes down the mandatory registration for oral copulation of a minor under 16, PC 288a(b)(2).
People v. Luansing; 2009 DJ DAR 11832; DJ, 8/12/09; C/A 2nd, Div. 2
