785 F.3d 1266
8th Cir.2015Background
- Billiot was convicted in Louisiana state court in 1996 and 1997 for aggravated incest and released from custody in February 2000.
- Louisiana law then required registration for ten years after release; later amendments imposed lifetime registration/notification for certain offenders.
- In December 2012, Billiot moved to Arkansas and admitted he knew he had a duty to register but failed to do so there.
- May 9, 2013, a federal indictment charged Billiot with failure to register in violation of SORNA; on November 21, 2013, he pled guilty to the SORNA count but argued that Louisiana officials had told him to register for ten years.
- The district court initially concluded there was no federal constitutional problem with extending registration obligations; on April 2, 2014, it allowed Billiot to withdraw his guilty plea and replead to an aggravated-incest-related Louisiana offense.
- On July 3, 2014, the district court sentenced Billiot to time served and five years of supervised release, including a sex-offender treatment requirement as a special condition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ex post facto validity of SORNA registration requirements | Billiot argues Louisiana's long-term registration violates Ex Post Facto. | State-law changes are not controlling; SORNA imposes independent federal obligations. | Ex Post Facto challenge to SORNA is misplaced; convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 2250 trigger federal punishment, not state-law registration. |
| Validity of the special sex-offender treatment condition | Special condition is inappropriate because not tailored to current offense. | Conditions are reviewable; waiver forecloses review in light of plea agreement. | Unreviewable due to Billiot's explicit waiver of appeal rights beyond Ex Post Facto issue. |
| Effect of appellate waiver on review of other issues | Waiver should not bar review of non-waived issues. | Plea waiver encompasses appellate rights; limits review. | Plea-waiver and agreement prevent review of the special-condition challenge. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. May, 535 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2008) (Ex Post Facto challenges to SORNA rejected; punishment arises from § 2250.)
- United States v. Waddle, 612 F.3d 1027 (8th Cir. 2010) (Same; SORNA challenges barred where § 2250 provides punishment.)
- United States v. Kebodeaux, 133 S. Ct. 2496 (202th. Cir. 2013) (Assumes SORNA constitutional under Ex Post Facto and Due Process.)
- United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2003) (En banc; review of special conditions limited by waiver.)
- Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (2003) (Upheld Alaska statute against ex post facto challenge; relevance to SORNA context.)