Solomon v. St. Charles Cnty. Prosecuting Attorney's Office, ED98559

• Decision Date: 23 July 2013
• Docket Number: No. ED98559,ED98559
• Parties: JOSEPH C. SOLOMON Respondent, v. ST. CHARLES COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, et al., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

JOSEPH C. SOLOMON Respondent,
v.
ST. CHARLES COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, et al., Appellants.

No. ED98559

Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION THREE

Filed: July 23, 2013

Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Charles County
Honorable Lucy D. Rauch
OPINION

At the crux of this case is whether a federal requirement to register as a sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA)¹ can serve as a basis to require registration as a sex offender pursuant to Missouri's Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA).² The Sheriff of St. Charles County, the St. Charles County Prosecuting Attorney, and the Missouri Highway Patrol (Defendants) appeal from the judgment entered after a bench trial in favor of Joseph Solomon (Solomon) on his petition for a declaratory judgment.

Solomon petitioned the trial court to be removed from Missouri's sex offender registry alleging that he was never obligated to register under Missouri law. Solomon also sought a declaration that his obligation to register under the federal sex offender

Page 2

registry had terminated. The trial court issued a judgment finding that Solomon was never obligated to register as a sex offender under Missouri law, and that his obligation to register under federal law terminated on April 4, 2011. We reverse and remand for the trial court to find that Solomon's lifetime registration requirement pursuant to SORA persists.

I. BACKGROUND

The Prosecuting Attorney of St. Charles County charged Solomon with endangering the welfare of a child in the first degree, a class D felony, in violation of Section 568.045.³ The complaint alleged that on or about July 1995, Solomon "engaged in sexual contact with [K.H.], a child less than seventeen years old for whom the defendant was a parent."

On April 4, 1996, Solomon pled guilty to the amended charge of sexual misconduct, a class A misdemeanor, in violation of Section 566.090. The information alleged that Solomon "purposely subjected [K.H.] to sexual contact without [K.H.]'s consent." The amended charge, the plea form, and the original disposition did not contain K.H.'s age. As required, Solomon registered as a sex offender under federal law pursuant to SORNA and in Missouri pursuant to SORA.

On June 30, 2011, fifteen years later, Solomon filed a petition requesting to be removed from Missouri's sex offender registry because the information filed in the underlying case failed to allege the victim's age. The petition alleged that Solomon was "improperly required to register with the Missouri Sex Offender Registry and has been improperly included in said Registry since his conviction in April of 1996."

Page 3

The trial court found that Solomon was never obligated to register as a sex offender under Missouri law because the documentation in the underlying criminal plea and conviction failed to allege the victim's age. The trial court further found that Solomon was no longer obligated to register as a sex offender under SORNA because such obligation terminated on April 4, 2011, after fifteen years. This appeal follows.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

Our review of a court-tried case is governed by Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). We will affirm the trial court's...