This bill also intends to make some of the reporting requirements more efficient, such as reporting address changes to local law enforcement only, no longer to DOC. The amended statute also requires registrants to report to local law enforcement at his or her scheduled time whether or not a verification letter is received. We are encouraging registrants to maintain your schedule and keep copies of your paperwork. It is a concern that the likelihood for failure to register could be more likely without documentation on the registrants part. Registrants need to assume all responsibility for their compliance. It is local law enforcement's responsibility to provide paperwork to DOC, but Registrants need to be sure they have documentable records of their visits. It appears the State is not prepared to implement this Statute. There has not been adequate promulgation.
Starkey vs Oklahoma - DOC determination is not date of conviction, it is the date you first registered. When applying the Starkey decision to your case, the date to use is NOT your date of conviction.
9/5/17 Tenth Circuit splits in holding revocation enhancements for SOs unconstitutional - Splitting two-to-one in a case out of Oklahoma, a panel of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that 18. U.S.C. 3583 (k) violates the 5th and 6th Amendments by requiring a revocation judge to impose a longer sentence for the original conviction based on the facts presented for purposes of revocation (and upon which revocation relied). This peculiar enhancement only applied to individuals who were originally convicted of a sexually-based offense and subsequently revoked while serving time on probation.
10/2/17Snyder vs. Doe - On Monday, October 2, and without comment, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Michigan’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Snyder v. Does. This means that the Sixth Circuit’s August, 2016 decision holding most (or much) of that state’s registration enhancements unconstitutional stands.