I’m linking to the unpublished version of this on Google Scholar, but rest assured its now published. Unfortunately, Google Scholar is behind and doesn’t have the published version of this up.
This opinion shouldn’t come as a surprise. He was convicted of rape of a child in the third degree, then was homeless and failed to register. A small problem when you’re trying to make sure someone doesn’t reoffend. After picked up for failing to register, the trial court placed a no-contact with children unsupervised into his sentence. Oddly enough, Division I found that no contact with children is related to the crime of failing to register as a sex offender for an underlying offense of raping a child. Weird, I know. They really had to stretch the bounds of legal interpretation to get to that one. Darned activist judges.
Because this is quite possibly the shortest opinion outside of denial of review, The Prof is going to get crazy and post the whole thing after the jump. Watch out! You never know what may happen next!