Texas Department of Public Safety v. Garcia, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 9794

Garcia was 21 in 2005 when he was charged in Oregon with contributing to the sexual delinquency of a minor; the victim was 17 and the act was consensual.
Garcia pled guilty to Or.Rev.Stat. § 163.435, received 36 months probation, which was revoked and replaced with 180 days jail time.
Garcia moved to Texas in 2007; the Texas DPS determined he must register for life as a sex offender based on substantial similarity under SORA.
Garcia appealed in 2009, challenging whether the Oregon offense is not substantially similar to a Texas SORA offense.
The district court found the Oregon offense is not substantially similar to Texas Penal Code § 22.011 and relieved Garcia from registration.
The Texas DPS appealed, and the Austin Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the Oregon offense is not a reportable SORA offense for Garcia.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is Oregon §163.435 substantially similar to a SORA offense?	Garcia argues Oregon crime not substantially similar to Texas §22.011.	Garcia contends Oregon offense is similar to SORA offenses.	Oregon §163.435 not substantially similar; Garcia not registerable.
May the court consider Garcia's conviction facts in the substantial similarity analysis?	Garcia argues facts should be considered.	Department argues only elements matter.	Facts may be considered, but not required in all cases; analysis supports not treating as substantially similar.

Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316 (Tex. 2009) (just and reasonable result governs statutory interpretation)
Ex parte White, 211 S.W.3d 316 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (conducts where age of consent differences affect substantial similarity)
Prudholm v. State, 274 S.W.3d 236 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2008) (conduct overlaps but foreign offense may be broader; requires careful comparison)
Cross v. State, 114 S.W.3d 92 (Tex. App.-Eastland 2003) (substantial similarity considerations tied to elements and accompanying facts)