United States v. Joshua Elkins
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12065
| 9th Cir. | 2012Background
- SORNA aims to create a national sex offender registry system.
- Elkins pled guilty to child molestation in Washington in 1994 as a juvenile and was ordered to register.
- He registered in Washington in 2000 and updated in 2010, but later left the state.
- In 2010 Elkins traveled from California toward Florida; Washington issued a warrant for probation violation.
- In 2010 a federal indictment under 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a) was brought; the district court dismissed, citing Juvenile Male I; the government appealed.
- The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding SORNA’s application not punitive and that there was sufficient knowledge to proceed to trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether applying SORNA retroactively violates Ex Post Facto. | Elkins argues retroactivity is punitive. | Government argues SORNA is civil, not punitive. | Not punitive; Ex Post Facto does not bar it. |
| Whether SORNA is punitive or a civil regulatory scheme. | Juvenile record disclosure makes SORNA punitive. | Court should treat SORNA as civil regulation; pre-SORNA conviction allowed. | SORNA is civil; not punitive as applied here. |
| Whether federal prosecution under SORNA requires state implementation. | Prosecution should await state implementation. | Prosecution independent of state implementation. | Federal duty to register exists regardless of state implementation. |
| Whether Elkins had knowledge to support § 2250(a)(3) conviction. | Lack of notice regarding SORNA undermines conviction. | Knowledge of state registration suffices; travel supports notice. | Sufficient evidence that Elkins knew of his Washington obligation. |
| Whether juvenile adjudication can anchor SORNA liability. | Juvenile status makes application unconstitutional. | Washington control and statutory structure render SORNA applicable. | Not barred; record shows no punitive effect to preclude application. |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (Supreme Court 2003) (upheld Alaska’s civil sex-offender registration as nonpunitive)
- United States v. Crowder, 656 F.3d 870 (9th Cir. 2011) (knowingly requirement in § 2250(a)(3) does not include knowledge that failure violates SORNA)
- United States v. George, 625 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2011) (SORNA can apply based on a prior conviction; failure to register is ongoing offense)
- United States v. Felts, 674 F.3d 599 (6th Cir. 2012) (confirms consensus that retroactive SORNA does not violate Ex Post Facto)
- Reynolds v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 975 (Supreme Court 2012) (context for Congress’s civil/regulatory framing of SORNA)
- Gould v. United States, 568 F.3d 459 (4th Cir. 2009) (SORNA’s goal to strengthen preexisting registration; constitutional framing)