SAN FRANCISCO — The First District Court of Appeal grappled with how a sympathetic convict might escape the lifetime brand of “sex offender.”
While refusing to find an equal protection violation in the sex offender registration requirement for a person convicted under California’s lewd conduct with a child under 14 law, a three-judge panel on Tuesday provided an alternate path for relief. The unanimous panel in People v. Tuck, A131624, suggested that a man named George Tuck apply for — and should be granted — a certificate of rehabilitation. The statute under which Tuck was convicted bars him from seeking such relief, but the panel suggested that bar may run afoul of equal protection principles.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
