State v. Benjamin Charette
189 A.3d 67
Vt.2018Background
- Defendant exchanged messages online with an account he believed to be a 13‑year‑old girl and agreed to meet for sex; the account was an undercover adult police officer.
- Defendant pled guilty to attempted luring of a child under 13 V.S.A. § 2828 and received an agreed sentence, with the registration issue reserved.
- Trial court ordered defendant to register as a sex offender under 13 V.S.A. § 5401(10)(B), which covers listed offenses “against a victim who is a minor” and expressly includes attempts.
- Defendant appealed, arguing the statute requires an actual minor victim and thus does not apply when the purported victim is an undercover adult.
- The State argued the statute’s inclusion of attempts means it covers convictions where the offender intended to target a minor, even if the victim was fictitious or an undercover officer.
- The Supreme Court affirmed, holding the registration requirement applies when the defendant believed the victim was a minor.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sex‑offender registration under 13 V.S.A. § 5401(10)(B) applies when the convicted offense was an attempt directed at a putative minor who was actually an undercover adult | Registration applies because statute covers attempts directed at a minor and protects public safety | Registration does not apply because the statute requires an actual, real minor victim | Registration applies: statute’s inclusion of attempts and purpose show it covers attempted offenses against a putative minor the defendant believed to be underage |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompson, 174 Vt. 172 (2002) (statutory interpretation should effectuate legislative intent and consider the statute as a whole)
- State v. Kerr, 143 Vt. 597 (1983) (court will not read language into a statute unless necessary)
- Spivey v. State, 619 S.E.2d 346 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005) (attempted internet sexual offenses involving an undercover officer require sex‑offender registration)
- Czyzewski v. N.H. Dep’t of Safety, 70 A.3d 444 (N.H. 2013) (registration statute applying to victims under 18 covers attempts where defendant subjectively believed the victim was a minor)
- Colbert v. Commonwealth, 624 S.E.2d 108 (Va. Ct. App. 2006) (solicitation to a purported minor in a sting falls within the statute’s evil and requires registration)
- People v. Buerge, 240 P.3d 363 (Colo. App. 2009) (when statute includes attempts, “victim” in relevant provisions can mean the intended victim)
- United States v. Dodge, 597 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2010) (federal registration statute applies when defendant believed the target was a minor)
