BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2781
PageA
Date of Hearing: April 15, 2008
Counsel: Nicole J. Hanson
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Jose Solorio, Chair
AB 2781 (Runner) - As Introduced: February 22, 2008
As Proposed to be Amended in Committee
FOR VOTE ONLY
SUMMARY : Affixes the following felony convictions to the list
of crimes requiring disclosure of the offender's name,
photograph, physical description, including gender and race,
date of birth, criminal history, prior adjudication as a
sexually violent predator, residential address, and any other
information the Department of Justice (DOJ) deems relevant via
public Internet Web site on or before January 10, 2010:
1)The sale or distribution of obscene matter depicting person
under age of 18 years engaging in sexual conduct;
2)The production, distribution, or exhibition of obscene matter;
3)The sexual exploitation of a child;
4)Employing or using a minor to perform obscene acts;
5)Advertising for sale or distribution obscene matter depicting
a person under the age of 18 engaging in or simulating sexual
conduct;
6)Possessing or controlling matter depicting a minor engaging in
or simulating sexual conduct; and,
7)Lewd or obscene conduct.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that on or before the dates specified in this
section, the DOJ shall make available information concerning
persons who are required to register pursuant to Section 290
AB 2781
PageB
to the public via an Internet Web site as specified in this
section. DOJ shall update the Internet Web site on an ongoing
basis. All information identifying the victim by name, birth
date, address, or relationship to the registrant shall be
excluded from the Internet Web site. The name or address of
the person's employer and the listed person's criminal history
other than the specific crimes for which the person is
required to register shall not be included on the Internet Web
site. The Internet Web site shall be translated into
languages other than English as determined by DOJ. [Penal
Code Section 290.46(a)(1).]
2)Mandates that on or before July 1, 2010, DOJ shall make
available to the public, via an Internet Web site as
specified, the following information:
a) The year of conviction of his or her most recent sex
offense requiring registration pursuant to existing law.
b) The year he or she was released from incarceration for
that offense.
c) Whether he or she was subsequently incarcerated for any
other felony, if that fact is reported to DOJ. If DOJ has
no information about a subsequent incarceration for any
felony, that fact shall be noted on the Internet Web site.
[Penal Code Section 290.46(a)(2)(A).]
3)Prohibits the use of information acquired via the registered
sex offender Internet Web site for purposes relating to any of
the following:
a) Health insurance.
b) Insurance.
c) Loans.
d) Credit.
e) Employment.
f) Education, scholarships, or fellowships.
g) Housing or accommodations.
AB 2781
PageC
h) Benefits, privileges, or services provided by any
business establishment. [Penal Code Section 290.46(l).]
4)Requires DOJ to operate a service through which members of the
public may provide a list of at least six persons on a form
approved by the DOJ and inquire whether any of those persons
is required to register as a sex offender and is subject to
public notification. The DOJ shall respond with information
on any person as to whom information may be available to the
public via the Internet Web site as provided under existing
law, to the extent that information may be disclosed. The DOJ
may establish a fee for requests, including all actual and
reasonable costs associated with the service. [Penal Code
section 290.4(a).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "The 'loophole'
in Megan's Law needs to be closed. Felony convictions of
child pornography and indecent exposure need to be added to
the list of specified sexual offenses that are fully disclosed
to the public, as well as misdemeanor convictions of child
pornography and indecent exposure to be added to the list
requiring minimal disclosure. Assembly Bill 2781 would
require that persons registering for these convictions be
included on the Megan's Law web site, therefore extending the
safety to protect the children of California.
"The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children released
a study in 2005 that found a proportion of arrested offenders
who both sexually victimized children and possessed child
pornography ranged from 35% to 51%.<1> Dual offenders pose a
greater threat to children and with increased disclosure via
Megan's Law web site, we can provide parents with the
resources to assist in their protection roles. With all
states having at least some form of Megan's Law enforced, it
is important that we continue to prevent more predators from
going after innocent children. AB 2781 will force these
misdemeanor offenders to be entirely disclosed on this web
site in California to further extend protection of our
---------------------------
<1> National Center for Missing and Exploited Children-online
study in 2005 (missingkids.com)
AB 2781
PageD
children."
2)Background : According to information provided by the author,
"Currently under Megan's Law in the Penal Code section that
specifically sets out the offenses that are disclosed on the
web site, many specified sex offenses are included, but it
neglects to address pertinent felonies and misdemeanors from
being listed to their fullest disclosure. According to the
Department of Justice who maintain the database, approximately
25% of registered sex offenders are excluded from public
disclosure by law.<2> Although those granted exclusion must
still register as sex offenders with their local law
enforcement, their information is not available through the
Internet, limiting the safety of our children.
"The 'loophole' in the law neglects to address the full intent
of protecting the children of California. Previous statistics
consistently show that nearly 40% of those involved with child
pornography are also molesting children.<3> The law in its
current form does not require a felony of child pornography to
fully disclose offender information to the public, and instead
as a misdemeanor conviction only requires minimal information
to be disclosed. Misdemeanor convictions currently require
the least information be disclosed on the Megan's Law web site
as opposed to being listed under the specified sexual offenses
requiring the broadest disclosure such as home address and
types of offenses committed.
3)Posting of Sex Offender Information on the Internet : On March
5, 2003 the United States Supreme Court decided the case of
Smith v. Doe (2003) 538 U.S. 84. Before then, the issue of
whether retroactively applying sex offender registration and
public notification provisions of Megan's Law violated the Ex
Post Facto Clause of the Constitution was unclear. In Smith
v. Doe, the court upheld the validity of the Alaska Sex
Offender Registration Act as a valid regulatory program that
does not impose punitive restraints in violation of the
Constitution. (Ibid.) The defendant argued that sex offender
registration and notification statutes resemble shaming
punishments of the colonial period that effectively banished a
person from a community. (Id. at 98.) The Supreme Court
acknowledged that some colonial punishments indeed were meant
---------------------------
<2> Megan's Law Web Site (www.meganslaw.ca.gov/sexreg.aspx)
<3> National Center for Missing and Exploited Children-online
study in 2005 (missingkids.com)
AB 2781
PageE
to inflict public disgrace. (Id. at 97-98.) Humiliated
offenders were required "to stand in public with signs
cataloguing their offenses." [Ibid. quoting Hirsh, From
Pillory to Penitentiary: The Rise of Criminal Incarceration
in Early Massachusetts (1982) 80 Mich. L. Rev. 1179, 1226; see
also L. Friedman, Crime and Punishment in American History
(1993) p. 38.] At times, the labeling would be permanent: A
murderer might be branded with an "M," and a thief with a "T."
[Ibid. referring to Semmes, Crime and Punishment in Early
Maryland (1938) p. 35; see also Massaro, Shame, Culture, and
American Criminal Law (1991) 89 Mich. L. Rev. 1880, 1913.]
The aim was to make these offenders suffer "permanent stigmas,
which in effect cast the person out of the community." (Ibid.
quoting Massaro, supra, at 1913; Hirsh, supra, at 1228.)
Respondents contended that Alaska's compulsory registration
and notification resemble these historical punishments, for
they publicize the crime, associate it with his name, and,
with the most serious offenders, do so for life. (Id. at 98.)
The Supreme Court rejected the comparison stating:
"Any initial resemblance to early punishments is, however,
misleading. Punishments such as whipping, pillory, and
branding inflicted physical pain and staged a direct
confrontation between the offender and the public. Even
punishments that lacked the corporal component, such as public
shaming, humiliation, and banishment, involved more than the
dissemination of information. They either held the person up
before his fellow citizens for face-to-face shaming or
expelled him from the community. [See Earle, Curious
Punishments of Bygone Days (1896) pp. 35-36, 51-52; Massaro,
supra, at 1912-1924; Semmes, supra, at 39-40; Blomberg &
Lucken, American Penology: A History of Control (2000) pp.
30-31.] By contrast, the stigma of Alaska's Megan's Law
results not from public display for ridicule and shaming but
from the dissemination of accurate information about a
criminal record most of which is already public. Our system
does not treat dissemination of truthful information in
furtherance of a legitimate governmental objective as
punishment. On the contrary, our criminal law tradition
insists on public indictment, public trial, and public
imposition of sentence. Transparency is essential to
maintaining public respect for the criminal justice system,
ensuring its integrity, and protecting the rights of the
accused. The publicity may cause adverse consequences for the
AB 2781
PageF
convicted defendant, running from mild personal embarrassment
to social ostracism. In contrast to the colonial shaming
punishments, however, the State does not make the publicity
and the resulting stigma an integral part of the objective of
the regulatory scheme . . . . The purpose and the principal
effect of notification are to inform the public for its own
safety, not to humiliate the offender. Widespread public
access is necessary for the efficacy of the scheme, and the
attendant humiliation is but a collateral consequence of a
valid regulation." (Smith v. Doe, supra, 538 U.S. at 99-99.)
4)The Purpose of Megan's Law : As discussed, Megan's Law is
intended to protect the public safety. The extent to which
there is a link between viewing or otherwise handling
materials depicting actual or simulated sexual or obscene
conduct involving a minor under 18 and committing sex crimes
against children is unknown. A March 19, 2001 Newsweek
article on child pornography noted, "Which fans of child porn
will go on to molest a child is unknown, as is the actual
number of pedophiles in the general population." Dr. Martin
Kafka of the McLean Hospital in Belmont, Massachusetts, told
Newsweek, "Some who look at child pornography have no history
of molesting. They seem to control their urges."
5)Child Pornography : Adding pornography crimes to the Megan's
Law Internet site creates unique issues. It is arguable that,
in and of itself, "child pornography" is an inherently vague
term. By comparison, many of the statutes cited above refer
to depictions of actual or simulated "sexual conduct" by any
person under the age of 18.
None of the "child pornography" offenses raised by this bill are
limited to young children; they all extend to conduct
involving minors up to the age of 18. In addition, sexual
conduct under Penal Code Section 311.11 is defined broadly.
Penal Code Section 311.11 pertains to depictions of "engaging
in or simulating sexual conduct," which is defined to as "any
of the following, whether actual or simulated: sexual
intercourse, oral copulation, anal intercourse, anal oral
copulation, masturbation, bestiality, sexual sadism, sexual
masochism, penetration of the vagina or rectum by any object
in a lewd or lascivious manner, exhibition of the genitals or
pubic or rectal area for the purpose of sexual stimulation of
the viewer, any lewd or lascivious sexual act as defined in
Penal Code Section 288, or excretory functions performed in a
AB 2781
PageG
lewd or lascivious manner, whether or not any of the above
conduct is performed alone or between members of the same or
opposite sex or between humans and animals. An act is
simulated when it gives the appearance of being sexual
conduct." Thus, for example, Penal Code Section 311.11 would
be violated by possession of an image depicting a 17-year-old
engaging in simulated masturbation while clothed. Many
parents of teenaged children might reasonably argue that this
could include many popular music videos.
The complexity of Penal Code Section 311.11 is further
illustrated by exceptions to its application. The section
does not apply to "drawings, figurines, statutes, or any film
rated by the Motion Picture Association of America [MPAA]."
Possession of depictions of conduct that perhaps would be
routine or unremarkable in rated films or in material that
might be accepted as "art," constitutes a crime under Penal
Code Section 311.11 if the depictions do not appear in such
contexts. For example, an unrated documentary or other
accurate depiction of relatively common behavior of high
school students likely would be criminal under a broad
interpretation of Penal Code Section 311.11.
6)The Law Enforcement Perspective : Others argue the link
between child pornography and molestation is clearer. In
testimony before Congress in 2002, the Chief for the Federal
Bureau of Investigation's Crimes Against Children Unit stated
in part:
"Our experience in the investigation of these crimes also
signals a strong correlation between child pornography
offenders and molesters of children. In Operation Candyman,
for example, of the 90 people arrested thus far for their
participation in the child pornography e-group, 13 of them who
chose to make inculpatory statements admitted to molesting a
combined total of 48 children . . . .
"My colleagues at the United States Postal Inspection Service
tell me that, according to statistics compiled from their
investigations, a frighteningly high percentage of the child
pornography offenders investigated were also involved in the
sexual molestation of children. Their studies indicate
consistently that of the total number of child pornographers
investigated over the past several years, nearly 40% have been
determined to be child molesters."
AB 2781
PageH
In addition, in November 2000, Dr. Andres E. Hernandez, Director
of the Sex Offender Treatment Program, Federal Bureau of
Prisons, FCI Butner, presented the results of his study of
child pornography offenders. . . . This study, among other
things, explored the correlation between child pornography
offenses and actual child molestation. Dr. Hernandez' data
indicates that the majority of the persons in his study
convicted of child pornography offenses actually molested
significant numbers of children without detection by the
criminal justice system.<4>
7)Reliability of Law Enforcement Data : According to Ron Kokish,
a researcher, author, professor, and licensed family therapist
and board-certified clinical social worker from California,
"Law enforcement data asserting that child pornography is a
marker for pedophilia is largely anecdotal, often relies upon
reversed probabilities, is rarely subjected to peer review,
and must be considered unreliable." Kokish points out that
law enforcement's mission is to protect the public, not to
collect scientific data. "Postal inspectors claim to have
'strong evidence' that many people they apprehend for
possession of child pornography have also committed hands-on
sex crimes against children. None of their material is peer
reviewed and none of it is published in detail. The published
material gives little hint how they know these men have
molested children.
"What I did find was arrest data for child pornography and very
strong assertions in newsletter and press release formats.
[I] was impressed by the way the Postal Inspector responsible
for collecting their data talked about the issue. If what he
says is mostly accurate, subjecting their information to
scientific analysis might produce some meaningful evidence.
Then again, it might not. I think the Postal Inspector data
is interesting and warrants scientific inquiry if the agency
will make it available to interested social scientists. In
---------------------------
<4>Testimony of Michael J. Heimbach, Crimes Against Children
Unit, Criminal Investigative Division, FBI, before the
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security,
Committee on the Judiciary United States House of
Representatives May 1, 2002,"Internet Child Pornography"
(as of March
25, 2008).
AB 2781
PageI
its present form, it warrants absolutely no conclusions.
"[In conclusion,] child pornography use may be a marker for
child molesting, but the burden of proof falls to those who
would make that assertion, and to date, they have not met it
to any significant degree."
8)The American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law :
A report, "Child Pornography: The Criminal Justice System
Response", issued by the American Bar Association and the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in March
2001, states that "accurate estimates [of child pornography]
are difficult because no valid and reliable methodology has
been devised to measure the amount of child pornography,
especially on the Internet. Attempts to quantify the problem
are hindered by the difficulty of discerning the ages of those
featured in pornographic images." (Emphasis added.)
The report concluded, "While a good deal is known about the
impact of child sexual abuse on children, little is known
about the specific long-term impact of sexual exploitation,
especially child pornography. Research is also scarce on
treatment programs specific to the needs of the sexually
exploited children. Without thorough examination and
evaluation of law enforcement, child welfare, and service
provision efforts, the justice system cannot accurately
understand the scope, effects or causes of child sexual
exploitation.
"Consequently extensive research should be conducted on . . .
the characteristics of adults and others perpetrating the
crimes. Longitudinal studies and evaluations tracking
responses from law enforcement and service communities should
be pursued.
"The criminal justice system should also pursue greater
community involvement in developing prevention efforts. It
should support the development of or increase in available
treatment for victims and services for at risk youth including
prevention and early intervention. The progress of law
enforcement and service providers should be examined and
studied so that successful programs can be replicated
nationally and in other countries."
9)No Predictability in Child Pornography Offenders Committing
AB 2781
PageJ
Future Contact Sexual Offenses : An April 2005 article by
Michael C. Seto (University of Toronto, Canada, and Center for
Addiction and Mental Health,) and Angela W. Eke, (Behavioral
Sciences Research Unit Ontario Provincial Police, and York
University, Canada,) published in Sexual Abuse: A Journal of
Research and Treatment, Vol. 17, "The Criminal Histories and
Later Offending of Child Pornography Offenders", examined a
sample of 201 adult male child pornography offenders to
identify potential predictors of later offenses.
Of the sample, 56% had a prior criminal record, 24% had prior
contact sexual offenses, and 15% had prior child pornography
offenses. One-third of the samples were concurrently charged
with other crimes at the same time they were charged with the
child pornography offenses.
According to the authors of this study:
"Unfortunately, there are no published data on the future
offending of child pornography offenders. In fact, there have
been only a few empirical studies on the characteristics of
individuals who are charged with the possession, distribution,
or production of child pornography.
"This study is the first ever to report on the later offending
of a sample of child pornography offenders. 17% of the
follow-up sample of 201 offenders had offended again in some
way within an average of approximately 2.5 years after their
release to the community, and 4% committed a new contact
sexual offense.
"Child pornography offenders with prior criminal records were
significantly more likely to offend again in any way during
the follow-up period. Child pornography offenders who had
committed a prior or concurrent contact sexual offense were
the most likely to offend again, either generally or sexually.
"As we predicted, and as would be expected based on generalist
theories of crime, there was a significant difference in later
offending between child pornography offenders classified into
groups according to the extent of their other criminal
behavior.
"Child pornography offenders who had ever committed a contact
AB 2781
PageK
sexual offense were the most likely to re-offend. These group
differences could be detected even though the overall rate of
sexual recidivism was low (4%).
"Only one of the offenders with only child pornography offenses
committed a contact sexual offense in the follow-up period.
More of this group of offenders might subsequently commit a
sexual offense as the duration of the follow-up period
increases, but our finding does contradict the assumption that
all child pornography offenders are at very high risk to
commit contact sexual offenses involving children.
"Three-quarters of our total follow-up sample did not have any
known history of contact sexual offending, which is consistent
with data from another Canadian sample of child pornography
offenders (Seto et. al., 2005) and American samples of child
pornography offenders (Federal Bureau of Investigation press
release (July 30, 2003) retrieved from
(as of
March 27, 2008).)
"One limitation of our study is that we had access to only
official records, so we did not have data on psychological
variables that would be relevant to understanding child
pornography offenders. Of particular interest are variables
that reflect anti-sociality (e.g.., anti-social attitudes and
beliefs, anti-social personality traits, childhood and
adolescent history of conduct problems) and atypical sexual
interests (e.g., self-reported interests, sexual history,
phallometric testing.)
"Another limitation is that we were only able to study
individuals who had been charged and convicted of child
pornography offenses. We did not have data from child
pornography users who had not come into contact with the
criminal justice system. Research on child pornography users
that takes advantage of methods to increase participant
recruitment and honest disclosure (e.g., anonymous Internet
surveys, certificates of confidentiality) could be very
illuminating. The ideal study design would recruit
non-criminal, non-clinical pedophiles from the community.
"Studying men who possess child pornography would allow us to
study pedophilia in a group that is less criminal, on average,
than correctional samples of sex offenders and perhaps less
AB 2781
PageL
clinically impaired than individuals who are assessed in
clinical settings. We would be able to determine what factors
distinguish men who have pedophilic sexual interests and do
not act on them and those who do act upon them by initiating
sexual contacts with children.
"Current theories of sexual offending would suggest that men who
go on to have sexual contacts with children will be higher on
indicators of anti-sociality (early conduct problems,
anti-social personality traits, criminal history, etc.,) than
those who do not."
Inasmuch as there is no documented body of scientific study
regarding the likelihood that people convicted of child
pornography offenses pose a significant risk to children in
the community this bill is unripe.
The goal of the Megan's Law Internet Web site is to protect the
public. As stated in the Seto and Eke study, supra, there are
no published data on the future offending of child pornography
offenders. In view of the paucity of evidence that child
pornography offenders are likely to commit contact sex
offenses against children, there is little reason to add child
pornography offenders to the Megan's Law Internet Web site at
this time.
10)Argument in Support : According to the California State
Sheriffs' Association , "Under existing law, DOJ must disclose
to the public, via their Internet Web site, information on
persons who have been convicted of the commission or the
attempted commission of a number of sexual offenses. This
information includes the person's name, a photograph, a
physical description, date of birth, criminal history, prior
adjudication as a sexually violent predator, and the address
at which the person resides. This bill would require the DOJ
to also disclose information on offenders convicted of a
felony for certain child pornography offenses and indecent
exposure.
"This bill expands the scope of disclosure, thereby providing
the public with additional tools to make proactive and
informative decisions regarding their safety."
11)Argument in Opposition : According to the California Public
Defenders Association , "This bill would amend Penal Code
AB 2781
PageM
section 290.46, governing the 'Megan's Law web site.' The web
site, operated by DOJ, allows the public to use personal
computers to view the name, photograph, residence address or
ZIP Code, and other information, about persons required to
register because of conviction of any of a number of specified
sex offenses. This bill would add several child pornography
offenses to the list of specified sex offenses. It would also
add indecent exposure to this list.
"The purpose of the Megan's law web site is to keep parents
informed about those registrants who are most dangerous, and
to keep our children safe. This bill will not accomplish and
will not further those purposes.
"This bill will not accomplish or further those purposes because
the child pornography convictions that would be added are, in
most all instances, derivative offenses that do not involve
personal infliction of sex crimes. The Megan's law web site
is currently limited almost exclusively to those sex offenders
who do personally inflict the live, actual, sex crimes.
Adding people who do not personally commit the live, actual,
sex crimes will dilute the web site and not further its
purposes.
"Also, the addition of indecent exposure (Penal Code Section
314) is unnecessary because many of these people will already
be registered, and many of the rest will not be the type of
person who should be on the Megan's Law web site because they
will never re-offend again.
"The offenses that would be added to the Megan's law web site
would be violations of the following sections of the Penal
Code:
a) "Section 311.1
b) "Section 311.2.2
c) "Section 311.3.3
d) "Section 311.4.4
e) "Section 311.10.
f) "Section 311.11.
AB 2781
PageN
g) "Section 314.5
"Obviously, the person who personally unlawfully used the
child to produce the pornography is guilty of the much greater
felony of child molestation, such as Penal Code section 288,
or worse. Those people are already required to be published
on the Megan's law web site, because it is those people whom
society must be most aware.
"But the child pornography offenses in the '311' series are
derivative. While many of these offenses do, by the
definition in Penal Code section 311.3, subdivision (a),
involve 'sexual exploitation of a child,' they do not involve
personal production of the originals by personal live child
abuse. The one section that does directly involve a child,
Penal Code section 311.4, does not involve the child in the
sex acts, but only in such derivative acts as sale or
distribution. Publication of information about these people,
who have not inflicted personal, live, abuse, does not
accomplish the purpose of the Megan's law web site.
"Two of these sections, Penal Code sections 311.1 and 311.2,
overtly contemplate that the guilty person probably did not
personally produce the material, but, instead, often initially
acquired it through email or internet. That is why those two
sections specifically exempt telephone corporations from
liability for carrying or transmitting such message, or
related activities. Penal Code sections 311, subdivision (d);
311.2, subdivision (g).
"Likewise, the child pornography itself might actually have
been, originally, lawfully produced for such things as
'legitimate medical, scientific, or educational activities,'
or by other methods of lawful production. Four of these
sections expressly contemplate such lawful production. That
is why these sections all have exceptions for such things as
'legitimate medical, scientific, or educational activities,'
or other methods of lawful production. Penal Code section
311(b) and (c); Section 311.2(e); Section 311.4(e); section
311.11(d).
"Of course, most child pornography will not have been lawfully
produced. But regardless of whether the material was
initially produced lawfully or unlawfully, still, most felony
AB 2781
PageO
violators of all these child pornography sections will not
have directly initially produced the material by personal
sexual exploitation of a child.
"Because the child pornography offenses in the '311 series'
almost always do not involve the direct personal sexual
exploitation of a child, persons convicted of those offenses
should not be listed on the Megan's law web site.
"As to indecent exposure in violation of Penal Code section
314, first-time offenses are misdemeanors. While lewd intent
is required to violate Section 314, still, most first-time
offenders will simply be young people who, upon realizing the
consequences, will never do that again.
"Most felony violators of Section 314 will be people who have
prior convictions of child molestation in violation of Penal
Code section 288, and will already be on the Megan's law web
site.
"There will be few remaining people who commit a felony
violation by entering a dwelling house without consent and
indecently expose. But to catch the very few remaining, this
bill casts too wide a net, by including many people who are
already registered, or who are not true sex offenders and will
never re-offend again."
12)Prior Legislation :
a) SB 43 (Battin), of the 2005-06 Legislative Session, was
substantially similar to this bill. SB 43 expanded the
Megan's Law Web site to include child pornography offenses.
SB 43 failed passage in this Committee.
b) AB 44(Parra), Chapter 745, Statutes of 2004, provided
that on or before July 1, 2005, sex offender registration
information shall be disseminated to the public through an
Internet Web site operated by the DOJ based on a tiered
classification system.
c) SB 422 (Florez), of the 2003-04 Legislative Session,
would have required the DOJ to provide a
publicly-accessible Internet Web page for the public
portion of the existing sex offender registry (Megan's
Registry). SB 422 also sought to delete the requirement
AB 2781
PageP
that DOJ provide the registry to law enforcement on CD-ROM;
require transmission of the information electronically
between January 1, 2004 and June30, 2004; and provide the
complete registry to law enforcement through the Web page
after that time. SB 422 failed passage in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
California Family Council
California Peace Officers Association
California Police Chiefs Association
California Sexual Assault Investigators Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
Crime Victims United of California
San Bernardino County Sheriff
Opposition
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Public Defenders Association
Analysis Prepared by : Nicole J. Hanson / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744