# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 2- 32 95

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

St ev e Ray W al ls

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Apri l 8 , 20 13 Fil ed : M ay

6, 2 01 3 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re COLLOTON, MELLOY , and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __
PER CURI AM.

St ev e Ray W al ls was in di ct ed fo r fai li ng to reg is te r as a se x of fen de r un de r th e Sex Offen de r Reg is tra ti on an d Not ifi cat io n Act (“ SORNA” or “ Act” ). See 18 U.S.C.§ 22 50 (a), (c); 42 U.S.C. §§ 16 91 1, 16 91 3. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed W al ls ’s m ot io n 1

to di sm is s th e in di ct m en t on se ve ral gr ou nd s. W al ls en te red a co nd it io na l gu il ty pl ea,

res erv in g h is rig ht to ap pe al th at de ni al . W e aff irm hi s co nv ic ti on

.

W al ls pl ed gu il ty to at te m pt ed ag gr av at ed se xu al ba tt ery in W y an do tt e Co un ty, Kan sa s, on Ju ne 26 , 1 99 5. At th e ti m e of hi s co nv ic ti on , t h e go ve rn m en t in fo rm ed
W al ls of hi s du ty to reg is te r as a se x of fen de r in Kan sa s. W al ls ha d se ve ral pr io r st at e

co nv ic ti on s f

o r f a il ur e to co m

pl y wit h Kan sa s’s reg is tra ti on req ui rem en ts

. On Ja nu ary 24 , 20 09 , W al ls was arre st ed in Kan sa s Ci ty, Mi ss ou r i
, on ou ts ta nd in g W y an do tt e Co un ty, Kan sa s warra nt s. In a Ja nu ary 27 , 20 09 in te rv ie w wit h th e Uni te d St at es Mar sh al s Serv ic e, W al ls ad m it te d th at he kn ew he was req ui red to reg is te r as

a se x o ffen de r in Mi ss ou ri b ut th at he ha d n ot do ne so

. He was rel eas ed to Kans as ,
co nv ic te d u nd er Kan sa s’s Offe nd er Re gi st rat io n Act , and pl aced on pro ba ti on

.

In Decem be r 20 09 , hi s Kan sa s pr ob at io n of fic er at te m

pt ed to co m

pl et e a ho m e vi si t at W al ls ’s p rev i o u s l y rep or te d Kan sa s Ci ty, Kan sa s ad dr es s bu t was un ab le to lo cat e hi m th ere. Aut ho rit ie s la te r lo cat ed W al ls in Kan sa s C i t y , Mi ss ou ri, an d he
rep or te d st ay in g at th e Ci ty Uni on Mi ss io n in Kan sa s Ci ty, Mi ss ou ri. W al ls ha d no t
reg is te red as a se x of

fen de r in Mi ss ou ri. A g ran d jury in di ct ed W al ls on on e co un t of vi ol at in g S ORNA fro m

Jan ua ry 27 , 20 09 , to Ju ly 13, 2 01 0.

On ap pe al
, W al ls rai se s th e s a me arg um en ts reject ed by th e di st ric t co ur t: (1 ) he ha d no du ty to reg is te r un de r SORNA be cau se he was no t sp eci fic al ly in fo rm ed of th e req ui rem en t pr io r to t h e ch arg ed of fen se , (2 ) hi s co nv ic ti on fo r a SORNA vi ol at io n vi ol at es th e Ex Po st Fact o Cl au se , (3 ) Co ng res s vi ol at ed th e no nd el eg at io n do ct rin e whe n it al lo wed th e Att or ne y Gen eral to es ta bl is h SORNA’s ap pl ic ab il it y to

se x of fen de rs co nv ic te d be fo re pa ss ag e of th e Act, an d (4 ) th e Att or n e y Gen eral

The Hon or ab le Greg Kay s, Uni te d St at es D i s tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-2

-vi ol at ed th e Adm in i s t r a t i v e Pro ced ur es Act (“ APA”) whe n he is su ed an in te rim

reg ul at io n de cl ari ng SORNA to be ret ro act iv el y ap pl ic ab le to th os e co nv ic te d be fo re th e Act pa ss ed wit ho ut ab id in g b y th e APA’s no ti ce-a nd -co m m en t re qu ire m en ts

.

Each of Wall s’s g ro un ds for ap pe al in vo lv es cla im s o f st at ut or y co ns tru ct io n

or co ns ti tu ti on al erro r, an d th us we rev ie w hi s ap pe al de no vo

. See Ro y al v. Kau tz ky, 37 5 F.3 d 72 0, 72 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ). W e are bo un d by o ur pr io r pr eced e n t, an d each of W al ls ’s ch al le ng es ha s be en pr ev io us ly reject ed by th is Co ur t. See Uni te d St at es

v. Bac cam , 56 2 F.3 d 11 97 , 11 99 -1 20 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (h ol di ng th at an of fen de r ne ed

on ly be n ot ifi ed of s ta te la w reg is tra ti on req ui rem en ts to su st ai n a co nv ic ti on un de r

se ct io n 22 50 (a)) ; Uni te d St at es v. W ad dl e, 61 2 F.3 d 10 27 , 1 0 2 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) ( h o l d i n g SORNA do es no t vi ol at e th e Ex Po st Fact o Cl au se be cau se it do es no t
pu ni sh de fen da nt s fo r ha vi ng be en co nv ic te d o f a c r i me bu t in st ead pu ni sh es se x of fen de rs who tra ve l in in te rs ta te co m m erce aft er SORNA’s en act m en t an d who fai l
to reg is te r as req ui red by SORNA); Uni te d S ta te s v. Kue hl , 7 06 F.3 d 91 7, 92 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (h ol di ng th e co ng res si on al gr an t of au th or it y t o th e Att or ne y Gen eral in
42 U.S.C. § 16 91 3( d) to be co ns ti tu ti on al ly va li d be cau se Co ng res s ha d se t fo rth an in te ll ig ib le pr in ci pl e to gu id e in th e ex erci se of th e gr an te d au th or it y ); Uni te d St at es

v. Knu ts on , 68 0 F.3 d 10 21 , 10 23 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (p er cu ria m ) (h ol di ng th at de fen da nt

co ul d no t ch al le ng e whe th er in te rim r ul e vi ol at ed th e APA’s no ti ce-a nd -co m m en t
req ui rem en t whe n he pl ed gu il ty t o v i o l a t i ng SORNA fo r a pe rio d of ti m e aft er th e fin al gu id el in es , whi ch di d go th ro ug h th e no ti ce-a nd -co m m en t pr oc es s, be cam e effe ct iv e o n Au gu st 1, 2 00 8)

.

W e th eref

or e aff irm th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-