2018 COA 90
Colo. Ct. App.2018Background
- In 2000 Brian McCulley pleaded guilty to two separate offenses involving unlawful sexual behavior: a felony (deferred judgment) and a misdemeanor (probation).
- Upon successful completion in 2004, the felony deferred judgment was dismissed and the misdemeanor conviction remained.
- As part of the deferred judgment, McCulley was required to register as a sex offender.
- In 2016 McCulley petitioned to discontinue the registration requirement; the trial court denied the petition.
- The court denied relief based on section 16-22-113(3)(c) of the Colorado Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA), which bars relief for an adult who “has more than one conviction” for unlawful sexual behavior.
- The principal legal question: whether the statutory term “conviction” in subsection 113(3)(c) includes a successfully completed deferred judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the SORA term “conviction” in §16-22-113(3)(c) includes a successfully completed deferred judgment | The statutory definition of “conviction” in §16-22-102(3) expressly includes a deferred judgment; thus McCulley has more than one conviction and is ineligible for deregistration | A successfully completed deferred judgment should not count as a conviction; relying on People v. Perry, the present-tense phrasing and context exclude completed deferred judgments | The court held that under the plain language of §16-22-102(3) “conviction” includes having received a deferred judgment; McCulley therefore has more than one conviction and is ineligible for deregistration; trial court affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Martin v. People, 27 P.3d 846 (Colo. 2001) (statutory interpretation principles; apply plain language unless ambiguous)
- People v. Perry, 252 P.3d 45 (Colo. App. 2010) (held “is convicted” in a different SORA subsection did not include a successfully completed deferred judgment to avoid statutory conflict)
- Dubois v. Abrahamson, 214 P.3d 586 (Colo. App. 2009) (noting legislature could have limited definition but did not)
- People v. Atencio, 219 P.3d 1080 (Colo. App. 2009) (multiple convictions across separate cases render person ineligible under §16-22-113)
- M.T. v. People, 275 P.3d 661 (Colo. App. 2010) (discusses circumstances where deferred judgments may not be treated as convictions in other contexts)