288 results for 'cat:"Sentencing" AND cat:"Sex Offender"'.
J. Briscoe finds that the lower court properly sentenced defendant for his convictions for engaging in a sexual act with a minor. Defendant claims that the lower court should have allowed a plea agreement that was proposed by both parties, but there were valid concerns on the record regarding defendant's behavior, struggles with alcohol, and likelihood of re-offending that gave the lower the court the discretion to reject the plea and sentence him to the maximum term of imprisonment. Affirmed.
Court: 10th Circuit, Judge: Briscoe, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 22-7041, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Plea
J. Menetrez finds that the trial court improperly denied defendant's motion to quash the state's subpoena seeking his case file in preparation for a resentencing hearing. The trial court must apply the factors in the appeal court's "Facebook Inc. v. Superior Court" opinion, which apply to subpoenas issued by both the defense and prosecution. That standard is used to determine if good cause exists to seek a defendant's entire case file, including medical and mental health records. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Menetrez, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: E081770, Categories: Criminal Procedure, sentencing, sex Offender
J. Ellender finds that defendant was properly sentenced to concurrent sentences of 30 years at hard labor, without benefits, on two counts of pornography involving juveniles under the age of thirteen. In this case, defendant's plea bargain on two counts of underage pornography was reduced from the original charge of over 2,000 counts. The large amount of images and videos seized from defendant's devices supports the sentence and shows defendant's deep and troubling involvement in child pornography. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Ellender, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 55,553-KA, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Aoyagi finds the trial court properly sentenced defendant, convicted of a total of nine sex crimes against two children. “Defendant committed the acts when he was 16 years old but he was not charged until he was an adult…[and] he went directly into adult court, rather than being waived into adult court.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Aoyagi, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: A178968, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Child Victims
J. Bishop finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for sexual assault. Though defendant claims the sex was consensual, testimony from the victim and another witness, as well as that from a medical examiner, establish the victim was raped and had injuries consistent with forced anal penetration. Defendant's DNA was also found in the victim's body. Defendant was properly sentenced within guidelines, and lifetime requirement to maintain sex offender registration does not amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Bishop , Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: A-22-913, Categories: Evidence, sentencing, sex Offender
J. Campbell finds the lower court properly revoked defendant’s probation, but improperly ordered him to serve his original sentence in confinement. Defendant was placed on probation after he pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted aggravated sexual battery. He was required to register as a sex offender and serve concurrent 10-year sentences on supervised probation. Defendant violated the terms of his probation when he was arrested and subsequently pleaded guilty to driving under the influence. As a result of the probation violation, the lower court revoked his probation and ordered him to serve his original 10-year sentence in confinement. Defendant argues the confinement order is excessive and he should have been placed back on supervised probation. The instant court finds the record lacks sufficient information to conduct a proper review, as the lower court failed to reason why it ordered defendant to confinement. The matter is remanded to the lower court for further consideration. Affirmed in part.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Campbell, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: W2023-01111-CCA-R3-CD, Categories: Probation, sentencing, sex Offender
J. Welbaum finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to sever various criminal charges to allow for separate trials as to each of his victims. The evidence for each victim was simple and direct and would have been admissible as other acts evidence if separate trials had taken place. Meanwhile, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to merge kidnapping for the purpose of sexual assault and rape convictions because his prolonged seizure of the victim was a separate and distinct animus from the rape of the victim, which allowed each conviction to carry its own sentence. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Welbaum, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-684, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Kidnapping
J. Curran finds that the appellate division properly held that assigning sex offender risk classification to two defendants was not premature since each likely faced civil confinement rather than community release upon completing their prison terms. Classification is required by law 30 days before release, which occurs when a sex offender no longer remains confined to state prison, regardless of the possibility of future confinement under mental hygiene rules for sex offender management. Affirmed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Curran, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 09, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Commitment
J. Egan finds that the lower court properly classified defendant as a risk level three sex offender. Defendant, who served time for sex crimes committed in two counties, contends the assessment was duplicative to an assessment conducted in another county, but the crimes in each county were different. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Egan, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: CV-23-0273, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender
J. Badding finds that defendant's request to modify sex offender registry requirements was properly denied because he refused to admit the facts of his crime and failed to complete sex offender treatment in light of his insincere admissions of guilt. Affirmed.
Court: Iowa Court Of Appeals, Judge: Badding, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 22-1967, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender
J. Pirtle finds the county court properly denied defendant's motion to continue his sentencing hearing. Defendant was convicted for possession and attempted possession of visual depictions of sexually explicit conduct. Though the court did not order a psychosexual evaluation, and defendant contends the presentence assessments were insufficient, nothing in the record indicates the evaluative method used was improper. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Pirtle , Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: A-23-664, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Due Process
J. Moore finds the county court properly convicted defendant by no-contest plea for sexual assault. Evidence and victim testimony shows defendant sexually assaulted his 14-year-old stepdaughter. Though the presentence report included police reports involving other events not at issue in the charge, the county court properly reviewed the report and sentenced defendant. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moore , Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: A-23-560, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Child Victims
J. Schock finds that although defendant completed the deferred judgment and sentence portion for several sexually-based offenses, the lower court properly denied his motion to be removed from Colorado's sex offender registry. He was convicted of assault in the same case and, therefore, is ineligible for removal. The exception that allows for removal from the registry following completion of a deferred sentence requires dismissal of the criminal case, but because defendant's assault conviction was not dismissed, and never will be, the exception does not apply to him. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Schock, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 2024COA14, Categories: Criminal Procedure, sentencing, sex Offender
J. Kyzar finds that defendant was properly convicted and sentenced on counts of indecent behavior with a juvenile and aggravated crime against nature. Defendant did not show he was denied the right to counsel when he sought to withdraw his guilty pleas or that the pleas were not voluntarily made. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Kyzar, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: KA-23-487, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Plea
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of criminal sexual acts after he showed an underage victim pornographic videos and masturbated in front of her. Prosecutors exercised due diligence in turning over a copy of the 911 call from the victim's family since the initial information provided to prosecutors lacked information about the call. However, the imposition of consecutive sentences was unduly harsh. Affirmed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: KA 22-01915, Categories: Evidence, sentencing, sex Offender
J. Gibbons finds the trial court, by plea agreement, properly convicted defendant for attempted sexual assault. Though defendant claims the probation condition requiring drug testing improperly delegates authority to the division of parole, his cited federal statute requiring courts to set the number of tests is not applicable to this case. Also, that defendant may not possess sexually stimulating materials is not overbroad. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Court of Appeals, Judge: Gibbons , Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 85986-COA, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender
J. Gladwin finds the trial court properly denied defendant's challenge to the special conditions for sex offender probation. Defendant pleaded guilty to allegations he forced his 11-year-old stepdaughter to undress in front of him and kiss him, and that he watched her while she showered. He says the probation conditions that prevent him from having any relationship with someone who has a minor child are unconstitutional. The conditions bear a direct relationship to preventing re-offense, even being that a stricter standard was applied for review. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gladwin , Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: CR-23-320, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Child Victims
J. Anderson affirms the defendant's sentence for third- and fourth-degree sexual conduct, finding that the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in Apprendi v. New Jersey and Blakely v. Washington do not alter the paradigm set in Minnesota courts in State v. Ronquist, which limited a requirement of prosecution by indictment for offenses punishable by life imprisonment to offenses so punishable before the application of sentencing enhancements based on prior convictions. That case's reasoning also exempts cases where lifetime conditional release is a possibility. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: A22-0318, Categories: Criminal Procedure, sentencing, sex Offender
J. Hendrickson finds the trial court properly imposed consecutive sentences after defendant pleaded guilty to two charges of sexual battery. The seriousness of his conduct, which included blackmail and threats against the minor victim if she refused to have sex, supported the increased punishment. Although defendant suffers from PTSD as a result of military service and expressed sincere remorse before he was sentenced, the trial court was not required to reduce the sentence and spoke on the record that it considered all required factors before it handed down consecutive sentences. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hendrickson, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-381, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Child Victims
J. Groban finds that the state failed to give defendant fair notice it would ask for an enhanced One Strike 25-years-to-life sentence for a sex offense count. The express pleading requirement of the One Strike law entitled him to know the specific facts the prosecution would rely on to support a sentencing enhancement. Late notification that the victim's young age would support the enhancement violated his due process rights, so the trial court must resentence him to 15 years to life. Reversed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Groban, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: S258376, Categories: sentencing, sex Offender, Due Process