*1 S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S WILLIAM SIM SPENCER, UNPUBLISHED

November 14, 2017 Plaintiff-Appellant,

v No. 337827

Benzie Circuit Court BENZIE COUNTY PROSECUTING LC No. 16-010475-CZ ATTORNEY,

Defendant-Appellee. Before: H OEKSTRA , P.J., and S TEPHENS and S HAPIRO , JJ.

S TEPHENS , J. ( Concurring)

I concur in the result but not the analysis of the majority. I agree wholeheartedly with the majority that the SORA amendments cannot be retroactively applied and that the trial court committed error in dismissing the declaratory action as “unripe.” The plaintiff was, in fact, in jeopardy of prosecution at the time of the trial court’s ruling because the Benzie County Assistant Prosecutor representing the office in this civil declaratory action had properly conflicted the office of the Benzie County Prosecutor out of the criminal case. The matter had been referred to the Attorney General with a request that a special prosecutor be appointed. The Assistant Prosecutor made a representation that she would not pursue any parole violation charges against the plaintiff for failure to adhere to amended registration requirements under SORA. The court appeared to believe that the judicial admissions of the Assistant Prosecutor would preclude any parole violation proceeding based upon the amended SORA registration requirement. However, she had no authority to bind the special prosecutor and thus the plaintiff remained in jeopardy.

/s/ Cynthia Diane Stephens -1-