636 F.3d 1327
11th Cir.2011Background
- Beasley was convicted in Mississippi in 1985 of a state sex offense and maintained a current Mississippi registration through 2006.
- He moved to Georgia in January 2007 and did not register there.
- SORNA was enacted in July 2006; the Attorney General issued a February 28, 2007 interim opinion applying SORNA to pre-enactment offenders.
- Beasley was prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a) for failing to register in Georgia after his move, despite SORNA’s applicability only after the interim rule.
- The Eleventh Circuit previously affirmed Beasley’s conviction, but the Supreme Court vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of Carr v. United States.
- Carr held that § 2250(a) requires the sequence: subject to SORNA, travels in interstate commerce, then fails to register; mere conviction or pre-application status is insufficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 2250(a) require three sequential elements? | Beasley: elements need not be sequential under prior precedent. | U.S.: Carr requires sequential elements: subject to SORNA, travel, then nonregistration. | Sequential elements required; remand. |
| Was Beasley subject to SORNA when he moved to Georgia? | Beasley contends he moved before SORNA applied to him, so not subject. | U.S.: SORNA applicability began with interim rule; Beasley moving precludes registration at travel time. | Beasley not subject when he traveled, vacate on statutory grounds. |
| Does Carr overrule Dumont and require similar sequential analysis? | Beasley relies on pre-Carr law. | U.S.: Carr controls and Dumont is limited by its factual posture. | Yes, Carr controls; Dumont overruled to the extent inconsistent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Carr v. United States, 560 U.S. _ (Supreme Court, 2010) (three elements must be met in sequence for § 2250(a))
- Dumont v. United States, 555 F.3d 1288 (11th Cir. 2009) (initial view that elements might not be sequential, later overruled by Carr)
- Madera v. United States, 528 F.3d 852 (11th Cir. 2008) (SORNA applicability to pre-enactment offenders after AG opinion)