Case Name: In re NICHOLAS K., JR., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Nicholas K., Jr., Respondent-Appellant)
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 2003-11-14
Citations: 344 Ill. App. 3d 333
Docket Number: No. 2-00-0968
Parties: In re NICHOLAS K., JR., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Nicholas K., Jr., Respondent-Appellant).
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports, Third Series
Volume: 344
Pages: 333–334

Head Matter:
In re NICHOLAS K., JR., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Nicholas K., Jr., Respondent-Appellant).
Second District
No. 2-00-0968
Opinion filed November 14, 2003.
G. Joseph Weller and R. Christopher White, both of State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Elgin, for appellant.
Meg Górecki, State’s Attorney, of St. Charles (Martin E Moltz and Marshall M. Stevens, both of State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor’s Office, of counsel), for the People.

Opinion:
JUSTICE McLAREN
delivered the opinion of the court:
The minor, Nicholas K., Jr., appealed from the trial court's order requiring him to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (the Act) (730 ILCS 150/1 et seq. (West 2000)). This court originally reversed the trial court's order in In re Nicholas K., 326 Ill. App. 3d 497 (2001). The State sought leave to appeal, and our supreme court, on its own motion, remanded the case to this court with directions to vacate our judgment and reconsider the case in light of In re J.W., 204 Ill. 2d 50 (2003). In J.W., the court held that juvenile sex offenders "are included within the larger category of sex offenders required to register" under the Act. J.W., 204 III. 2d at 65. In light of this decision and the supreme court's specific pronouncement that our decision in this case did not change its holding in J.W. (see J.W., 204 Ill. 2d at 65), we must vacate our prior ruling, affirm the order of the trial court ordering the minor to register as a sex offender, and remand the cause for further proceedings.
For these reasons, the judgment of the circuit court of Kane County is affirmed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
Affirmed and remanded.
HUTCHINSON, EJ., and GEOMETER, J., concur.