Never convicted of sex crime, but man still must register as offender

Star Tribune ^ | 08/07/03 | Howie Padilla

[bedolido]

A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld a Minnesota law that required a man to register as a sex offender even though he has not been convicted of a sex crime.

Minnesota's sex offender registration law and the Minnesota Supreme Court's interpretation of it "turn reason and fairness on its head," wrote Judge C. Arlen Beam, who nonetheless concurred in the unanimous decision of a three-judge panel of the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis.

Brian Gunderson was charged in 1998 in St. Louis County with first-degree criminal sexual conduct after a woman he met in a bar accused him of rape, the ruling said. Gunderson denied raping her but admitted they had a "physical altercation." Tests supported his version of events, and the rape charge was dismissed.

As part of a deal with prosecutors, Gunderson pleaded guilty to a new complaint charging him with third-degree assault. He was sentenced to 15 months in prison, which was stayed, and three years probation.

Less than a year later, the ruling said, Gunderson violated his probation and was sent to prison. While in custody, he was told he would have to register as a sex offender under a state law that requires it whenever someone is convicted of a sex offense "or another offense arising out of the same set of circumstances."

After registering, Gunderson sued the Corrections commissioner. He argued he should not have to register because the original rape charge had been dismissed and the assault statute under which he was convicted was not covered by the registration statute.

But the Appeals Court panel said it agreed with the Minnesota Supreme Court's reasoning in a 1999 decision upholding the law. The Minnesota court ruled that a defendant who was charged with a sex crime but pleaded guilty to a lesser charge included in the same complaint had to register.

Gunderson also argued that the registration statute violated his constitutional rights if it required him to register as a sex offender even though he was never convicted of sex crime.

The court rejected that argument, finding that the registration law is regulatory, not punitive, in nature, and that it serves a legitimate state interest, that is, to keep track of known potential sex offenders.

[HurkinMcGurkin]

The court rejected that argument, finding that the registration law is regulatory, not punitive, in nature,

Its funny how courts almost always seem to find laws that punish like this to be regulatory rather than punative.

and that it serves a legitimate state interest, that is, to keep track of known potential sex offenders.

Oh, wait a second. Now its POTENTIAL sex offenders? Heck, NOW says all men are potential rapists. This is ludicrous. Where the hell do they get "potential sex offenders" from? There would be no diference in saying that anyone accused of a sex offense should have to register because they potentially are an offender whether charged and convicted, or not.

[TheBattman]

The court rejected that argument, finding that the registration law is regulatory, not punitive, in nature, and that it serves a legitimate state interest, that is, to keep track of known potential sex offenders.

Under that logic, every Catholic Priest should be registered.

Asinine is the word that comes to mind. If they prosecution wanted him registered, they should have taken the gamble and put him on trial for rape. As the evidence stood, they had no case for rape. If no rape or sexual assault took place, then how is it fair or legal (or Constitutional for that matter) to force him to register as a sex offender - which, according to the record, he is not.

[Sarah]

'Less than a year later, the ruling said, Gunderson violated his probation....'
Uh, I'd like a 'heads-up' concerning this lovely man....

[joesnuffy]

a state law that requires it whenever someone is convicted of a sex offense "or another offense arising out of the same set of circumstances."

So if the guy was falsley accused of rape but during the course of the non rape he was convicted of littering he will be registered as a "sex offender" That seems fair... IN BIZARRO WORLD anyway Women and minorities the protected species....all others are villians

[Skywalk]

Of course you would, he's a man after all, right?

How do you know what his violation was, and does it matter? It's the PRECEDENT this sets.

[Defiant]

Actually, although it's a stupid law, there's nothing wrong with it. The state could require people convicted of shoplifting to register if it wanted, and what it calls the registry is just semantics. Maybe he should sue for libel, if he is called a "sex offender" by the registry, but good luck.

[Orangedog]

So if the guy was falsley accused of rape but during the course of the non rape he was convicted of littering he will be registered as a "sex offender" That seems fair... IN BIZARRO WORLD anyway Women and minorities the protected species....all others are villians

I just watched a segment on John Gibson's show where he and Napolitano talked about this. I don't know what stunned me more...that this was allowed to happen, or the "oh well" attitude by them and the total lack of anything other than "What will this do to Kobe?!"

[Orangedog]

The court rejected that argument, finding that the registration law is regulatory, not punitive, in nature, and that it serves a legitimate state interest, that is, to keep track of known potential sex offenders.

So regulation is now officially extra-consitutional, or above being subject to restraints placed on the government by the Bill of Rights.

Now it's official...the "grand experiment" in the republican form of self governance that was the United States of America is over...it failed. The public doesn't care about this or any of the other "regulatory" or "public policy" tyrannies until it happens to them.

Remember the story of the lady who asked Ben Franklin "What kind of government have you given us?" I think the better question now is "What kind of government have we regulated out of existance?"

[Sinner6]

What is really scary about this is that if the case made it to the SCOTUS I don't see the result being any different.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

As part of a deal with prosecutors, Gunderson pleaded guilty to a new complaint charging him with third-degree assault. He was sentenced to 15 months in prison, which was stayed, and three years probation.

There is an editorial agenda at work in this little tale. This is not an innocent man, and they reluctantly put this little tidbit in.