 |
| Careful what you say . . . |
By Amy Davis
The Vermont Sex Offender Registry is a website available to the public that contains information about sexual offenders in Vermont who are required to register. This case questions whether an individual is required to register if the “victim” in the case wasn’t actually a kid, but an undercover police officer. In other words, does it really count if it’s just a sting? Why yes, yes it does.
Defendant pleaded guilty to attempting to lure a child based on his attempt to meet someone be believed was a minor. Supposedly, this wasn’t the guy’s first time trying to do that. Apparently, someone complained about him talking to minors inappropriately, so an investigator posed as a 13-year-old girl named “Alexa” and reached out to him on Facebook. Honestly, the guy should have just asked an Echo Dot to talk dirty to him (NSFW)—it would have ended better. But he asked “Alexa” to meet up with him for sex and he got arrested when he showed up for the meeting.
The plea agreement called for a to-serve sentence, but the parties disagreed as to whether Defendant was required to register as a sex offender. Defendant argued that the plain language of 13 V.S.A. § 5401(10)(B) requires a minor victim. The statute reads, “A person who is convicted of any of the following offenses against a victim who is a minor… (v) sexual exploitation of children as defined in chapter 64 of this title… (x) an attempt to commit any offense listed in this subdivision.” The court concluded that Legislature intended "minor victim" to include an undercover police officer posing as a minor. Defendant appeals.
On appeal, Defendant still argues that the language requires an actual minor victim and not an adult investigator posting as a child. The State argues that the statute covers attempts to exploit children, including cases where the defendant intended to have sex with a minor, even though it turned out the intended victim was actually an adult.
In deciphering Legislative intent, the Court first looks at the plain meaning, and if that’s not clear, the Court then looks at the entire statute, subject matter, effects and consequences, and the reason and spirit of the law. The SCOV concludes that, in looking at the statute as a whole, the inclusion of convictions for attempts, the purpose of the statute, and the consequences were it to follow defendant’s interpretation, the registration requirement applies in Defendant’s case.
The SCOV then goes on to compare its analysis to those of other courts in Georgia, New Hampshire, Virginia, and Colorado as persuasive authority for upholding its interpretation, and affirms Defendant’s conviction.
Comments
Post a Comment