Koffel Law Blog
Recent Posts
Appeals Court Reviews Robbery Case for Second Time This Year
Appeals Court Affirms Trial Court Ruling to Suppress Drug Evidence
Koffel Law Firm Attorney Tod Brininger Wins Case for Client on Appeal
Franklin County Police Implement Eyeglass Cameras
DUI Prevention Device Bill Not Supported by Ohio Judges
"Attempting to Cause an Unintended Death" Not a Recognized Crime in Ohio
Probable Cause Necessary Before Arrest Warrants, Rules Supreme Court
The Problem Is Not Just Your Brain. The Problem Is Boredom.
Most Popular
Xanax Use Among College Students Reaches "Epidemic" Proportions
Types of Informants
Judicial Release in Ohio -- Early Release from Prison
California Voters Reevaluate Sentencing Laws
Why a Defendant Wouldn't Take the Witness Stand
Archives
2014 (96)
2013 (99)
2012 (76)
2011 (46)
2010 (54)
2009 (5)
2007 (3)
2006 (18)
Practice Areas
DUI Defense
BMV Hearing
DUI With Injury
Multiple DUI
Ohio DUI / OVI Case Results
Ohio DUI / OVI Overview
Ohio DUI / OVI Penalties
Underage DUI
Ashland County DUI / OVI
Columbus DUI / OVI
Delaware County DUI / OVI
Fairfield County DUI / OVI
Licking County DUI / OVI
Madison County DUI / OVI
Morrow County DUI / OVI
Richland County DUI / OVI
Serious Vehicular Crimes
Aggravated Vehicular Assault
Aggravated Vehicular Homicide
Drag Racing
Driving Under Suspension
Nitrous Oxide & Motor Vehicle
Ohio Fleeing & Eluding
Ohio Hit-Skip
Reckless Driving
Theft Crimes
Credit Card Fraud
Embezzlement
Forgery
Fraud
Investment Fraud
Mortgage Fraud
Stock Broker Misconduct
Workers' Comp Fraud
Drug Crimes
Cocaine
Deception of Obtaining Drugs
Drug Cultivation
Drug Paraphernalia
Drug Trafficking / Sale
Heroin
Marijuana
Meth
Possession of Drug Documents
Possession of Drugs
Trafficking Marijuana
Vicodin
Sex Crimes
Computer Sex Crimes
Disseminating Matter Harmful to Juveniles
Gross Sexual Imposition
Importuning
Ohio Offense Tiers
Ohio Sex Offender Registration
Pandering/Child Pornography
Prostitution
Public Indecency
Rape
Sexual Battery
Sexual Imposition
Unlawful Sexual Conduct
Voyeurism
High School and College Cases
ADD/ ADHD & Teen Use
Affluence & Teen Use
Alcohol & Teens
Cocaine & Teens
Heroin and Teens
Marijuana & Teens
Turbulent Teens: Advice for Parents
Underage Possession of Alcohol
Other Offenses
Assault
Bench Warrants
Bond Hearings
Criminal Damaging
Disorderly Conduct
Domestic Violence/Assault
Gambling Offenses
Juvenile Crimes
Probation Violations
Vandalism
Learn more about criminal defense
Get a copy of our DUI E-Book today
Get in Touch

Failure to Register as a Sex Offender

Sex Offender Registration Pitfall

"Charlie" came into our offices on a Monday morning. He had just returned from a five-day cruise in the Gulf of Mexico. The trip took a total of nine days, as he drove to and from the departure port in Florida, taking his time on both drives.

Upon re-entering the US, a Border Patrol agent stopped "Charlie" and asked him if he had notified the sheriff's offices, in Ohio and Florida, of his planned trip. "Charlie" had not done so, as paperwork he had indicated a ten (10) day period of time he could be gone. The Border Patrol agent allowed him to enter the US with explicit instructions to notify the Ohio sheriff's office immediately upon his return to Ohio.

According to "Charlie", he had pled guilty, in another state, to a crime that earned him a Tier I sex offender rating. He moved to Ohio with two years remaining on his reporting sentence.

Since moving to Ohio, he had completed every registration request made of him, up to this point.

On January 1, 2008, SB-10 took over for Adam's Law, automatically adding another five years of reporting for Charlie. 139 days after SB-10 took effect, Charlie received a letter from the other state, terminating his reporting status.

Ohio law indicates, "Except as provided in division (C)(2) of this section, an eligible offender who is classified a tier I sex offender/child-victim offender may make a motion under division (B) of this section upon the expiration of ten years after the eligible offender's duty to comply with division (A)(2) or (4) of section 2950.04 or division (A)(2) or (4) of section 2950.041 and sections 2950.05 and 2950.06 of the Revised Code begins in relation to the offense for which the eligible offender is subject to those provisions." 2950.15(C)(1)

Did "Charlie" receive any type of notification from the Ohio sheriff's office regarding the potential of filing this motion? We highly doubt it.

It has been said, "Ignorance is no excuse for the law" but that old adage is usually saved for the prosecutors and judges when they are talking with defense attorneys or defendants. With the wide, sweeping changes SB-10 made to Adam's Law, who can keep up? Who is ignorant and who is in the know?

Hindsight is always 20/20. SB-10 sounded like a good idea to a group of lawmakers, taking effect in a year in which many of these lawmakers would be seeking re-election. Would they have allowed the bill to pass had they known countless taxpayers dollars would be spent trying cases only to have an appeals court rip the law as unconstitutional?

"Charlie's" case does have a bright spot. After heavy negotiations with the detective handling his case, "Charlie" was allowed to report to the sheriff's office, fill out a new registration form, endure a lecture from the detective handling his case and be allowed to leave without being locked up in jail for a few days.

Comments

No Comments Posted
614.675.4845
The Koffel Law Firm - Columbus Criminal Defense Lawyer
Located at 1801 Watermark Drive, Suite 350
Columbus, OH 43215
Local Phone: (614) 884-1100.

Attorney Web Design

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.