I wasn't aware of anyway to expunge a sexual crime, I thought a lot of states closed that way for RSOs to get relief?

@independent You're right in that most states have closed that avenue for sex offenses but the Certificate of Rehabilitation is a California only method that still covers some sex offenses. A COR is extremely difficult to get like next to impossible but it is still a possibilty

Aladdin, you have to actually point to a piece of legislation or official website, otherwise I'm just taking your interpretation of a complicated law.

BTW, there seems to be a lot of talk about moving states AFTER being removed from the registry. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about moving to a state while on the registry and registering in the new state, then getting removed in that state and STAYING THERE.

Registered, you will have to register for the longest limit based on the states you have had to register in. So, as we have said multiple times, if you ever registered in FL, you are on the registry for life, regardless of what the term limit is in a new state.

If someone had to register for 10 yrs in one state, and moved to another state that requires that conviction to register for 15, then they will have to register for 15 yrs.

If someone only had to register for 10 yrs in their state, and moved to CA or FL, they will have to register for life.

@registered Rew already pointed to the actual legislation and took the extra step of providing links to the legal opinions of some very talented lawyers. It is complicated but I'm in Missouri with a Florida conviction and MO has already been through this with many being removed from the registry only to be put back on because even though the MO registration law violated the MO constitution and was struck down there is still a federal requirement to register. The Starkey decision in Oklahoma removed many from the registry that still have a federal requirement to register and if they move out of state the requirement will kick in. Luckily for Oklahoma nobody is pushing the federal requirement to register like they did here in MO. Here they took another case to court just to establish there was a federal requirement register and were successful. Since there is now a precedent for that if the same is tried in Oklahoma it will be successful and the Starkey decision will no longer have any meaning.

On top of that I can't provide you with any other legislation or information that would apply directly to you because the only jurisdiction you have mentioned is Florida where supposedly you were convicted. SORNA ALWAYS LOOKS TO THE JURISDICTION OF CONVICTION AS PART OF THE DETERMINATION OF A REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER! (This is a rule issued by the Attorney General and the DOJ under authority granted to the DOJ by SORNA and the Administrative Procedures Act) If any jurisdiction says you have to register then SORNA and the DOJ say you have to register it's just that simple. SORNA is retroactive meaning even though you were convicted prior to its passing it still applies so you don't get to duck under the radar if you engage in interstate commerce by moving. The legality of the retroactivity in state law is what was challenged in MO and OK. The MO constitution has a specific clause against the retroactive application of any law not just criminal ones and initially this challenge was successful. In OK the retroactivity was challenged on an ex post facto criminal basis claiming that registration was punitive in nature and could not be applied retroactively. Starkey was successful in this challenge but neither the MO decision or the Starkey decision affect the federal retroactivity in any way.

Now you are currently registered in a state that isn't going to hold you to the lifetime registration requirement a Florida conviction carries with it. If and when you move your new registration requirements will depend on three things. 1. SORNA 2. Your Florida conviction and 3. The registration laws in the state you move to.

A. Because you have a conviction in a jurisdiction that carries a lifetime registration requirement engaging in interstate commerce will trigger a federal requirement to register so no matter what you MUST notify the receiving state of your Florida conviction or face a federal FTR charge.

B. The receiving state may or may not credit you for time already served on a registry.

C. The receiving state may or may not allow you to be removed from the registry at some point in the future.

D. The receiving state may hold you to lifetime registration because Florida sentenced you to lifetime registration. As I stated before many states have a clause that says you have to register for as long as the jurisdiction of conviction says you have to register.

E. This has to be stressed again but engaging in interstate commerce is what triggers federal jurisdiction. This does not just mean moving it also means just crossing state lines and SORNA carries its own time period in which to register. Even though you may not have to register where you reside at some point in the future going on vacation out of state can trigger the SORNA requirement to register because your jurisdiction of conviction sentenced you to lifetime registration SORNA was enacted to replace the Wetterling Act and close the exact loophole you wish to try to exploit which is to escape the lifetime registration you were sentenced to by moving to a jurisdiction with more lenient registration requirements.

"While sex offender registration and notification in the United States are generally carried
out through programs operated by the individual states and other non-federal jurisdictions, their
effectiveness depends on also having effective arrangements for tracking of registrants as they
move among jurisdictions and some national baseline of registration and notification standards.
In a federal union like the United States with a mobile population, sex offender registration could
not be effective if registered sex offenders could simply disappear from the purview of the
registration authorities by moving from one jurisdiction to another, or if registration and
notification requirements could be evaded by moving from a jurisdiction with an effective
program to a nearby jurisdiction that required little or nothing in terms of registration and
notification.

Hence, there have been national standards for sex offender registration in the United
States since the enactment of the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually
Violent Offender Act (42 U.S.C. 14071) in 1994. The national standards from their inception
have addressed such matters as the offenses for which registration should be required, updating
and periodic verification of registration information, the duration of registration, public
notification, and continued registration and tracking of sex offenders when they relocate from
one jurisdiction to another.
Following the enactment of the Wetterling Act in 1994, that Act was amended a number
of times, in part reflecting and in part promoting trends in the development of the state
registration and notification programs. Ultimately, Congress concluded that the patchwork of
standards that had resulted from piecemeal amendments should be replaced with a
comprehensive new set of standards—the SORNA reforms, whose implementation these
Guidelines concern—that would close potential gaps and loopholes under the old law, and
generally strengthen the nationwide network of sex offender registration and notification
programs"

The gaps and loopholes closed under the old law are your exact situation. You were specifically targeted for special consideration by SORNA.

Well said Aladdin.

It sounds like MO is pulling the same stunt that MD was doing. When our highest court declared that the registry being applied retroactively violated the MD constitution, DPSCS said they couldn't take anyone off due to the federal requirement to register. It took a long time until they finally took John Doe named in the original lawsuit off the registry because his offense occurred before MD had a registry. Then they finally started taking off others whose offense also happened before the registry.

good article, Aladdin. I would hope though that an individual state would still have the right and ability to remove someone from their registry if they determined them to be "not a risk".

@registered Yes the individual states do have the right and ability to do just that are there are limitations on federal power when it comes to being able to charge someone with an FTR as long as that person stays in the same state so intra state travel or moving is generally fine but any interstate travel brings you into federal jurisdiction.

Putting some things together from your comments here and in other threads (if any of this is wrong please correct me) you were convicted in 2005, your alleged "victim" was 16 years old and you were only 18. If all that is correct then you should know Florida passed a Romeo and Juliet law 2 years after your conviction that makes it possible to be removed from the registry. The Romeo and Juliet provision applies if the victim was at least 14 years of age and the offender was no more than 4 years older than the victim at the time of the offense.

They also made some provisions for sexual conduct with "certain minors". The "certain minors" means 16 and 17 year old children can consent to sexual conduct with persons from 16 - 23 years of age. This is specific to chapter 794 charges but it may mean whatever happened that put you on the registry is no longer a crime depending on what your specific conviction is for.

Here's a link with some info on how the Romeo and Juliet law and other provisions work

http://tinyurl.com/a45vpow

If I have the facts of your case right I'd start contacting Florida attorneys right away because you shouldn't be on the registry at all even by Florida standards.

Unfortunately, I just barely miss the Romeo and Juliet law. I said "she said she was 16", she was actually 13 almost 14, shocking I know. But remember, I didn't pursue her in any way, I simply didn't block a blowjob that she initiated. I was 18.

@rewdiazepam and @aladdin and others - I have been reading up on SORNA and would like to pick up this discussion another day, in a new thread, when I think I remotely understand what it is about - what a beast. I still do not get it but am trying. Hey, most lawyers do not get it, of that I am sure. But thank you all for your lengthy and thoughtful responses.

In the meantime I wish to yield to the original poster whose thread has been hi-jacked (apologies) or to @registered and how he is getting off the, any, registry for a blowjob with a 13 year old in Florida or any other state. Much more interesting...