MENUMENU
CA Case to Determine Certificates of Rehabilitation
balance

A California Court of Appeal issued a decision this week that expands eligibility for registrants to apply for a certificate of rehabilitation. The decision, People v. Tirey, states that a registrant who was convicted of PC 288(a) and who completed parole 13 years ago is eligible to apply for a certificate.

“This is an important decision for many registrants,” stated attorney and CA RSOL vice president Chance Oberstein. “It will significantly expand the number of registrants who can apply for a certificate of rehabilitation.”

In this case, the appellate court clarified that it was not making a decision whether Tirey would obtain a certificate. Instead, that decision is to be made by a trial court.

According to the Court, equal protection principles were violated when Tirey was declared ineligible to apply for a certificate. These principles have the possibility of being applied to convictions for similar sex offenses such as PC 288 and 288.5.

In its decision, the Court rejected all arguments offered by the Attorney General who had requested a rehearing of the original case.

“A certificate of rehabilitation currently is the only realistic method for registered citizens to be removed from the sex offender registry,” stated Oberstein.

The decision to grant a certificate of rehabilitation is a discretionary decision by a state judge who faces re-election. In order to maximize the possibility of obtaining a certificate, registrants must provide the court with a psychological evaluation as well as letters of support.

Judge Thompson disagreed with the court’s ruling and in his dissent stated that the court’s decision “will allow thousands of serious sex offenders to escape their lifetime parole and sex offender registration obligations.”

The opinions expressed within posts and comments are solely those of each author, and are not necessarily those of Women Against Registry.

3 thoughts on “CA Case to Determine Certificates of Rehabilitation

  1. I feel that not all sex offenders should be on the registry for life, not all will commit another crime, most are one time incidents, that’s why after a certain time they should be evaluated. I myself have a son whose life has been so messed up, he has four kids who he can’t see, can’t complete the education of going to college, can’t live in a decent place because the registry says he doesn’t deserve a normal life, it’s a lot I have to tell, unfortunately, my illness, and financial status prevents me from going to the rallies, if someone could possibly contact me, my son should get an evaluation definitely. Thank you

  2. My fiance was convicted 14 yrs ago but it has been so hard to find work or housing that he has a couple fail to comply and has made it harder on us and our newborn…hes a good man and has not reoffended…

  3. I committed sex crimes against a 26-year-old woman in 1978 when I was 18 years old. Forty years later I still wear the stigma of my crimes via the Scarlet Letter represented by the sex offender registry. The person who committed my crimes no longer exists. I matured into a compassionate man sympathetic to victims and others who are disadvantaged. Nevertheless, the registry keeps me tethered to the criminality committed four decades ago. No legitimate societal interest is advanced by my situation.

Leave a comment.