agree that this case presents a question of statutory construction specifically a question as to whether a defendant can be convicted under section three of us or where he has complied with all the requirements of article shall consist of a statement in writing signed by the person giving the information that is required by the department of state police and the state says that section eight should be incorporated into section three the state says repeatedly throughout a brief such statute are and appears in reversing the circus's conviction for failure to register the court highlighted the problems that were caused by the fact that the regulations and forms that are issued by the state police are inconsistent register for failing to comply with an obligation that did not exist under the under the legislation which was the new requirement that the state intended he had to reregister his fix president after a brief period of time substantive information the stones included in the body was registration form is name is current address phone number physical description and cetera that that was inaccurate nor is there any claim of the police were deceived as to mr own source for i believe it would also then be appropriate to read into section three the requirement of materiality which is found in section one of the which makes a class three felony to provide material false information to police again mr own signing of the form with other than its form and true name was that material to the question of whether to register the change of address with the police which is what he was charged with it provided your incomplete information regarding this change of i thank you justice for cat scan that i had some trouble hearing everything you said but i just want to clarify some things in my own head truly evil acknowledge that the signature on the back of the form in a small box is consistent with or in compliance with section eight of the same act because a child sex offender it's required to sign that he or she because they're the legislature the law of the state police to determine what constitutes a felony violation for example i was section three as i said contained a very detailed list of what the and the people in the neighborhood or in their family but it's not something that the legislature requires so i think it's expanding in such and really to allow the state police to say this isn't a valid registration requesting in any way enhance the the information that's been received or complete the information that's been received as required by the rest of the form requiring the signature relates to the notification of sex offenders obligations under the yeah in effect they're saying we want you to infer that you've been notified that you have to register every year that there's a change of address to a certain person and so on but the put you know before the signature is not required to be it's not required to be signed under also it's not required to be at one point mr owens did say that that was his new signature didn't he he said that's ok now with reference to peers to the best of your knowledge has the form knowledge as late as yesterday there has been no effort by the legislature to change any of the directions to the l and i state police on this issue correct not as far as i know  information and it gives a little even from ation but then i go to section eight and it talks about registration and it says registration as required under the article shall consist of a statement in writing signed by the person giving the information aren't we i'll believe gated to read those two provisions together in determining what registration ultimately entails and doesn't the materiality argument it makes sense to me i just also seen it also seems to me that it is fair to read three meet together but i have no additional questions thank you so i and then the section three goes on to i think what is right the five problems with section three with all those includes very specific information as to signature whether it be a driver's license bank check utilized by law enforcement the method of identification identifying whether or not this good morning or honors victoria justice for the people of the state of illinois may please the court and counsel your honour's we are looking at the sex offender registration act and the defendant here was charged under section three which was the duty to register as justice brennan was pointing out the duty read register requires a sex offender to register and a person looking at section eight section eight i'm sorry your honor the carpet check decided to pick up right now the duty to buy just straight chen as required by the article consists of a statement in writing this registration in section eight is the definitional article for the overall act we see both in section three and section six which includes the  to report and to register in person this applies to the overall act so we incorporate the definition into the entire act because we do not read relevant seshadri provisions in isolation there interpret it together as counsel pointed out the stache it doesn't cite an offense just as you wouldn't charge someone with the definition of a pan of penetration in the sex offense the charge was properly brought under section three so in reading the relevant portions of the act together the plain language of the act provides for a duty to register and the act makes clear what is required for the registration a completed and thus valid registration is a statement in writing signed by the person giving the information because of this the concerns of state agency broadening authority be on the confines of legist straight slate on the conference the legislature crafted in the statute that justice hutchinson expressed in pierce along with the supreme court are not present here the legislature deferred to police essentially the format by which the registrant provides the accurate information but the legislature still dictated that the registration had to be signed it defined registration as the statement in writing signed by the person giving the information so the illinois state police requiring a signature both on the front and the back of the form the initials on the provision provisions does not bro on the confines of the statue which required the form to be signed the signature was not a delegation to the police to include whatever they wanted to on the form this is not a separation of power issue where the act does include a reference to a signature or at least the word is signing a signed writing so we do not have the situation in pierce where there is additional requirements that are not specifically within the act the act gave fair notice of what is required it was assigned writing both pierce and brock have looked at the fact that fulfilling the registration requirements includes signing a completed registration form therefore to complete the registration pod process in other words your duty to register the signed writing must be generated the sign rating is important because it is both verifying the accuracy of the information and this importance of skilful old it is not only kept by local law enforcement the person who may be seeing the id and the purse the registrant in person may not be the person later reviewing it or looking up the information it is also sent to other agencies that records the information for access to state wide law enforcement and the public again they are not going to have that firsthand access to the person to verify it is indeed that we also want to know who signed the form because the signer is now responsible for the information provided and the notice of his future duty to report or register and any consequences of the violation of those duties this issue notice was presented and moan are where it found that when the defendant signed in the initials the registration form that notified him of the duty is under the act and the violation of the act which provided sufficient notice and acceptance of these notice provisions here we have a person who wrote an expletive on his form this was not an attempt to comply with the registration by providing an assigned writing there was information to infer this writing was false in other words not the defendant's mark we have the forms from before and after this forum which were less than a month apart on either side the court could also reject reject the defendant's explanation to police that this was his new signature the court could properly reject the mark as an acknowledgement of acceptance or acknowledgment this was an attempted protest we're looking at the choice of words themselves the statement to police that this was his new signature and a similar form of protest in the photograph of him flipping off the courthouse so while one can adopt a new signature with a new name the court properly rejected that this was the defendant's name and this was not his signature on the form therefore it is a mix standard of review we are considering both the proper elements of the statute under statutory construction once we have determined what elements are proper the court considers the sufficiency of the evidence under the collins standard looking at reasonable inferences not substituting judgment for the fact finder and questions involving the weight of evidence and credibility of the witnesses and looking at whether the writing than provided on the form constituted a signature questions thank you justice for cat was joseph on page one of the form where the signature appears it is just a signature at least as i see it an y signature of the registering office or where exactly on that signature does it acknowledge that i understand my responsibilities to register under this act which is one of the things you mentioned is the purpose of the signature that one is not your honor that one would be what is verifying the information on the form the accuracy of the information that is correct now on page two there is well there are some things that haven't been filled out and i'm not sure who didn't fill them out but it does say i have read and or had ridge to be the above requirements it has been explained to me and i understand my duty to reduced or next to her before blank how exactly does the signature help anybody there as far as the next registration it does not appear on or other and i don't i honestly don't know the requirements as to whether they have to put that every time you change your address as to updating you when the next time if the previous i know there are yearly annually reporting requirements and i know some of the other forms did have the date so i do not know why that one did not have it but as far as other duties that the offender had to know and the fact that the legislature does sex offender is is generally what it's talking about correct well the st the st sentence is the general definition of whatever registration under the article consists of  then the additional language as to where a child sex offender can be so the people were not reading it as limited as to only child sex offenders well as a matter of at least the st signature and we'll deal with the nd one in a moment again consistent with peers there is this this doesn't do anything to help the the police or doesn't do anything to acknowledge the accuracy of the information so it would appear to be confusing and surplus correct you're talking any signature at all or the on the on the front page on the front page serve it if it's not acknowledging that the information is correct and it doesn't say that and yes it is not being you to verify information that's on the st page that i cannot answer your honor ok on the nd page or the back page whichever you know where it the issue if we are not sure whether or not mr owens is a child sex offender what's the purpose of that signature again the purpose of the signature is to verify the accuracy of the information provided we do know that this is being looked at by more than just the person who is taking in the information so we're not going to have as the information travels to another officer within the state they are not going to have matched the defendant and necessarily see that he has provided the identification and also you know this is he is now responsible for what is on the form i know that the courts of looked at like in molnar if we now come back and say he was extended ten years because of the failure to register as as defined by the act and this extends it and he comes back and say well on this form i never signed it so i never had notice because this is not my signature that is another reason why the signature requirement is important and and i do not remember your honor whether both the both the pierce and brock case whether they were child sex offenders or not when the courts were looking at the requirement for registration including the signed writing  now let's in looking through and preparing to for today i went to the indictment count two and the indictment alleges that the defendant refused to sign his personal signature to his registration form the witness who testified and i believe the only witness who testified was a state police officer who has some responsibility for reviewing these documents and he was asked if he was there at the time that mr owens was at the two calculus department and he and his answer here is what he was asked sergeant were you present at the time mr owens filled out any of the registration forms that miss and as who i assume was the assistant state's attorney provided to you this afternoon answer no i wasn't  is it proven that he refused to sign his personal signature on vista form based upon the evidence presented at trial it's upon the evidence we're looking at the fact that the evidence vet was used for this was the fact that he claimed this was his news signature but none of the other forms before or after contains the signature so it was could be rejected as not a credible statement by the defendant by the trial court and the choice again we're looking at the choice of the protest being used here was evidence of the fact that he was not going to comply with putting his name but the state has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this the the charge in this indictment is correct the fact that he signed a different name a year before and signed that same name the year after that on his letter of last less well it was less than a month before in a less than a month after right and name changes do occur in a courtroom as opposed to refused to sign his personal signature to the registration form there was no evidence of that other than coming back less than a month later he was back to the same signature he was using in december  combination of three and eight to provide a signature that he did not do so what say you to this argument that failure to provide the signature in the context of all the other information accurately provided the defendant's photo renders that absence if you will in material for purposes of section tends penalty  need that i don't have section ten in front of me i know i can only recall that parts of section ten were considered required and knowing and willful and parts required was a strict liability and unfortunately i cannot remember the specific breakdown of  ten as far as whether it's under the strict liability part of that not meeting the requirement is not meeting the requirement if we're looking at a willful and knowing we do have evidence here that he knew he had to sign it and he knew what to sign before and after as far as material as ice as was stated before we did this is a specific requirement that was dictated by the legislature that we using to verify the accuracy of the information we do we don't want people coming in and signing these for other people but everybody single person who registers provides a photo at the time for just raised and i presume if i was in law enforcement i'd much rather compare the photos in the signatures and the photos are online or not certainly more so than the signatures they would be on or i mean t photo isn't going to tell us that the person has accepted and acknowledged the provisions of the form that is them in terre ality aspect of it that we that the person needs to know realizing that the form is missing a date do you recognize that your honor but the rest of the provisions with it is material to know the people maintain that the where it says there is a duty to register that the section eight then becomes the definitional instruction for what registration requires section eight is the definition of article for the registration act or there's a separate subsection section two of the act which is called definition and yet at that there's no definition of register if they want to define it they should have defined it there and back that was the problem that  why isn't it included in section three if it's the element of the offense so only final thing i would talk about is  police require a sign writing to ensure the nose other than that the purpose of this act was served they knew where he was they knew who he was the signature the net anything