Opinion ID: 2541566
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Kentucky's Sex Offender Registration Act

Text: To fully understand this case we need to look at the original requirement for certain sex offenders to register, and the amendments thereto, to date. KRS 17.500 et seq. is commonly referred to as Kentucky's version of Megan's Law, [9] or the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA). [10] The first version was adopted by the General Assembly in 1994. [11] Under this version, persons convicted of certain sex crimes [12] after the effective date of the Act, July 15, 1994, were required to register for a period of ten years after their final release from prison, parole, probation, etc. Failure to register, or providing false, misleading, or incomplete information was deemed a Class A misdemeanor. [13] The Act only applied to those convicted of a qualifying sex crime after the effective date of the Act, July 15, 1994, regardless of the release date. [14] Appellee was convicted of the sex crimes at issue on December 14, 1993. Under the clear wording of the 1994 Act, he was not required to register upon conviction or release. In 1998, SORA was amended. [15] The principal change ... was the creation of a classification as to the potential for recidivism. The law also provided for a risk assessment. [16] The 1998 Act provided the registration requirements shall apply to persons individually sentenced or incarcerated after the effective date of this Act [July 15, 1998]. [17] Appellee had served out on his qualifying sex crimes on October 1, 1997. Under the 1998 amendments to SORA, Appellee was not required to register. SORA was amended again in 2000. [18] This amendment eliminated the need for a risk assessment, based the length of registration on the offense committed, and required the registrant to register on or before the day of release. [19] This amendment also placed residency restrictions on a registrant released on probation, parole, or supervised release. [20] The penalty for failing to register, or for providing false or misleading information, was increased from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class D felony. [21] The 2000 amendment applied to all persons who, after the effective date of this Act [April 11, 2000], [22] are required under ... this Act to become registrants[.] [23] Appellee committed his sex crimes in 1993 and was released on a serve out on October 1, 1997. Under the 2000 amendments, Appellee had no requirement to register. [24] SORA was amended again in 2006. [25] The 2006 amendments subjected those required to register under this or prior law to a Class D felony for the first offense of violating the registration law and enhanced the penalty for subsequent offenses to a Class C felony. [26] The amendments also expanded the residency restrictions and increased the penalty for violating such. [27] As Appellee was not required to register under prior versions of SORA, he was not required to register under the 2006 revisions. SORA was revised in 2007 to include human trafficking involving commercial sexual activity of minors, [28] reorganizations, etc., [29] none of which are involved in the case herein. SORA was amended in 2008 [30] to deal with the collection, etc., of DNA samples of registrants. Again, this was not an issue in the case of Appellee. Appellee was never required to register under any version of SORA.