By: Derek Hawkins//April 13, 2016//
United States Supreme Court
Case Name: Nichols v. United States
Case No.:15-5238
Focus: Sex Offender Registry
Sex Offender Registration and Notifcation Act does not require appellant to update registration in one state after moving from that sate.
“SORNA’s plain text dictates this holding. Critical here is §16913(a)’s use of the present tense. Nichols once resided in Kansas, but after moving, he “resides” in the Philippines. It follows that once Nichols moved, he was no longer required to appear in Kansas because it was no longer a “jurisdiction involved.” Nor was he required to appear in the Philippines, which is not a SORNA “jurisdiction.” §16911(10). Section 16913(c)’s requirements point to the same conclusion: Nichols could not have appeared in person in Kansas “after” leaving the State. SORNA’s drafters could have required sex offenders to deregister in their departure jurisdiction before leaving the country had that been their intent.”
Reversed