Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA); Requirement to register under the 2021 SORA; People v Kardasz; Ex post facto punishment; People v Betts

In an order in lieu of granting leave to appeal, the court reversed the Court of Appeals judgment (see eJournal # 83334 in the 3/25/25 edition), vacated the trial court’s 8/7/23 order to the extent it was inconsistent with the court’s opinion in Kardasz, and remanded to the trial court. The court held that requiring defendant to register under the 2021 SORA was an unconstitutional ex post facto punishment. He committed the crimes at issue in 1995, but he was being required to register under the 2021 SORA. “The statutory requirements enacted after the commission of his crimes – the entirety of the SORA, which did not exist in any form at the time of the offenses – amount to punishment.” For the reasons articulated in Betts as “to the 2011 SORA, the 2021 SORA may not be retroactively applied to registrants whose criminal acts subjecting them to registration occurred before enactment of the 2011 SORA amendments, and severance or revival of prior versions of the SORA is not appropriate.” The court denied leave to appeal in all other respects because it was not persuaded that it should review the remaining questions presented.