145 So. 3d 350
La.2014Background
- Two brothers committed indecent behavior with juveniles in 2004 when they were ages 12 and 13; victims were 5 and 7–8. The offenses were reported years later and the defendants were prosecuted as adults under La. Child. Code art. 857(C)(2).
- As adults (ages 20 and 21) they pled guilty in district court to one count each of indecent behavior with a juvenile (La. R.S. 14:81).
- The district court suspended imprisonment, placed both on supervised probation, and ordered fifteen-year sex-offender registration under La. R.S. 15:542.
- Defendants appealed, arguing that because they were under 14 at the time of the offenses and indecent behavior with a juvenile is not among the juvenile offenses listed in La. R.S. 15:542(A)(2)–(3), they should not be subject to adult sex-offender registration.
- The Louisiana Supreme Court reviewed whether an adult who pleads guilty as an adult to a statutorily enumerated sex offense committed while a juvenile must register under La. R.S. 15:542(A).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants must register under La. R.S. 15:542(A) after pleading guilty as adults to indecent behavior with juveniles that occurred when they were under 14 | State: The statute applies to “any adult … who has pled guilty to … a sex offense” and indecent behavior with a juvenile is an enumerated sex offense, so adult guilty pleas trigger registration | Defendants: Registration should be determined by offender’s age at commission; juvenile offenders under 14 (and offenses not listed in the juvenile subsections) were not intended to be subject to registration | The Court held the plain text of La. R.S. 15:542(A)(1) controls: adults who plead guilty to an enumerated sex offense must register, so these defendants must register; remedial purpose and precedent support applying law at sentencing/adult plea time |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Olivieri v. State, 779 So.2d 735 (La. 2001) (sex-offender registration is remedial, not punitive, and may be applied as a sentencing consequence)
- State v. Patín, 842 So.2d 322 (La. 2003) (sex-offender law in effect at sentencing may apply without violating ex post facto)
- Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 (1995) (start statutory interpretation with the statute's text)
- Cat’s Meow, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, 720 So.2d 1186 (La. 1998) (legislative intent guides statutory interpretation)