Persons convicted of sex offenses in New York do not have to specifically disclose to the state that they have, and use, an account on Facebook, so long as they register their email address and don't use a fake name, the state's highest court ruled Thursday.

The decision, which was unanimous, will allow an indictment against a Ticonderoga man, who did not disclose to the state that he used the social networking website, to be dismissed.

But it could also allow thousands of sex offenders previously brought up on the charge to have their convictions vacated, according to the attorney for the defendant.

The question in the case was whether Arthur Ellis Jr., who according to an Essex County prosecutor's brief in the case was convicted in 2011 of a sex offense, was obligated to disclose specifically that he had an account on Facebook when he registered with the state Division of Criminal Justice Services.

Ellis was represented before the high court by Noreen McCarthy, a solo practitioner from Keene Valley in Essex County. She said the decision was “perfect, just, and right,” and urged defendants who've been charged or convicted in similar situations to pursue a reversal.

“To have the word out there, that people who have been convicted of this specific offense, their convictions can be vacated,” McCarthy said. “I'm not sure how to reach many of these people and it reaches across the state now.”

Ellis faced a felony charge from the Essex County District Attorney's Office after he was found to have an account on Facebook, but had not said as much to the state. He had disclosed his full name and the email address, which he used to access the website, but did not write on the form that he used Facebook.

The Essex County District Attorney's Office had argued, at the time and before the high court, that a Facebook account falls under the definition of an “internet identifier,” which sex offenders are required to list on annual filings with the state.

Internet identifiers are defined in the state correction law as “electronic mail addresses and designations used for the purposes of chat, instant messaging, social networking or other similar internet communication.”

That definition was created when the Legislature passed the Electronic Security and Targeting of Online Predators Act, or e-STOP, in 2008. The bill was pushed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, when he was the state attorney general at the time, to require sex offenders to register their email addresses and online screen names.

Ellis had moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that a Facebook account should not be considered an internet identifier. He argued that he'd fulfilled the statutory requirements by providing the state with the name he used on the website and he email address he used to log in—even if he never said he had an account.

A justice of the Essex County Court rejected that argument and denied the motion. Ellis pleaded guilty to the charge and was sentenced to time served and a three-year conditional discharge.

The Appellate Division, Third Department reversed the trial court's decision and dismissed the indictment against Ellis. The appellate court ruled that a Facebook account did not fall under the state's definition of an internet identifier, which meant that Ellis didn't have to disclose that he used the website.

Associate Judge Eugene Fahey of the Court of Appeals said the same in the high court's decision handed down Thursday.

“The Appellate Division correctly concluded that Facebook is not an 'internet identifier,' and that the existence of a Facebook account—as opposed to the internet identifiers a sex offender may use to access Facebook or interact with other users on Facebook—need not be disclosed to DCJS,” Fahey wrote.

Instead, Fahey wrote, sex offenders are required to disclosed the internet identifiers that they use to access Facebook. In this case, Ellis disclosed both his email address and the name he used on the website—both of which could be considered internet identifiers, and therefore required disclosure.

The case may have been different if Ellis used a fake name on the website and didn't disclose it, Fahey wrote, but that wasn't the case here.

“Similarly, the name one uses to interact with other users on Facebook—such as a screen name, pseudonym or alias—may be an internet identifier that must be disclosed to DCJS,” Fahey wrote. “Here, however, there is no dispute that defendant used his real, full name to interact with other Facebook users.”

That ties into the second part of the decision, which deals more with the court's interpretation of the e-STOP law. The legislative history, Fahey wrote, showed that lawmakers and Cuomo were concerned with the ability of sex offenders to interact anonymously on the internet with others, including children.

The state is allowed, under the law, to release a sex offender's internet identifiers to “authorized internet entities,” such as Facebook. Those entities can then use the identifying information to monitor sex offenders for any criminal activity or threats to public safety.

But the current law, Fahey wrote, does not require sex offenders to list which “authorized internet entities” they use.

“The legislature could have easily included among the mandatory disclosure provisions of Correction Law § 168-f (4) the 'authorized internet entities' that a sex offender uses, such as Facebook,” Fahey wrote. “Presently, however, that statute does not require sex offenders to disclose to DCJS the authorized internet entities that they use.”

Fahey was joined on the opinion by the court's six other judges: Chief Judge Janet DiFiore and Associate Judges Jenny Rivera, Leslie Stein, Michael Garcia, Rowan Wilson, and Paul Feinman.

The Essex County District Attorney's Office did not immediately return a call seeking comment Thursday.

READ MORE:

NY Court of Appeals Weighs Whether Sex Offenders Must Disclose Facebook Accounts

Divorce Judgments Need Only Be Entered, Not Docketed, NY Court of Appeals Rules

Rent Stabilization Should Remain for Apartments Built With Tax Abatements, NY High Court Rules