United States v. Roberson
752 F.3d 517
1st Cir.2014Background
- Roberson was Massachusetts convict on indecent assault and battery of a child in 1998.
- He did not appeal that conviction and never registered as a sex offender between 2010 and 2012.
- In July 2012, Roberson was federally indicted under SORNA for failing to register.
- Roberson challenged the indictment after state court later vacated his predicate Massachusetts conviction due to defective plea colloquy.
- District court denied dismissal; Roberson pled guilty conditionally and was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment.
- Court held SORNA’s registration obligation applies based on the fact of conviction, even if later vacated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether vacated predicate can support SORNA | Roberson: vacated conviction cannot support SORNA predicate. | Roberson: SORNA uses fact of conviction, regardless of later vacatur. | Predicate survives despite vacatur; conviction fact governs. |
| Does 'was convicted' require a currently valid conviction | Roberson: 'was convicted' means valid conviction only. | Roberson: plain language covers historical conviction regardless of validity. | Plain meaning controls; not limited to valid convictions. |
| Burgett and related due process concerns apply to SORNA | Burgett invalidates use of uncounseled prior conviction for current offense. | Lewis controls; civil regulatory disability may be enforced criminally without Burgett concerns. | Burgett does not preclude SORNA predicate use; Lewis applies. |
| Applicable interpretation governing SORNA under Lewis and Kebodeaux | Roberson argues a broader due process risk. | Court should follow Lewis; SORNA aims to regulate registration, not punish the invalid conviction. | Post-Lewis interpretation consistent with statutory text and Kebodeaux. |
| Effect of other constitutional challenges to SORNA | Challenging Ex Post Facto, Due Process, Equal Protection, etc. | Circuit precedent forecloses these challenges. | Broader challenges foreclosed by binding circuit precedent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (Supreme Court, 1980) (interprets 'was convicted' as fact of conviction, not validity)
- Mendoza-Lopez v. United States, 481 U.S. 828 (Supreme Court, 1987) (administrative review context; due process concerns in deportation)
- United States v. Kebodeaux, 133 S. Ct. 2496 (Supreme Court, 2013) (Legislative scheme for SORNA; uniform national system)
- United States v. Whitlow, 714 F.3d 41 (1st Cir., 2013) (post-Lewis analysis of SORNA scope)
- United States v. Parks, 698 F.3d 1 (1st Cir., 2012) (SORNA is civil regulatory measure enforceable by criminal sanction)
- United States v. Samson, 533 F.2d 721 (1st Cir., 1976) (statutory language: 'convicted by a court' interpreted broadly)
- United States v. Currier, 821 F.2d 52 (1st Cir., 1987) (predicate conviction can exist when on appeal or under review)
- Burgett v. Texas, 389 U.S. 109 (Supreme Court, 1967) (uncounseled conviction cannot support guilt or enhance punishment)
- Snyder v. United States, 235 F.3d 42 (1st Cir., 2000) (vacatur of state conviction does not invalidate federal predicate for felon in possession)
- Lobo v. State, N/A (N/A) (placeholder to avoid empty entries)