[Larry NeelyAdmin]

In re Gadlin, S254599 (CASC) Opinion Released 12-28-20 By Larry . . . This appeal was handled by Janice Bellucci, an attorney in California, who is we
[See the full post at: Those on registry can’t be categorically excluded rules CA Supreme Court]

[Tom Kurey]

How do I get in contact with Janice Bellusci regarding my rights under recently passed California’s SB384. I have been on the registry for over 20yrs and would like to be removed from the DOJ Website even if I still have to register.

[Sandy RozekAdmin]

Janice can be reached through ACSOL.

[Tim in WI]

There is no way to prevent ex post registrants from practicing their right to fair trial & jury an FTR scenario either. What i like from this article about challenging authority and winning. Ultimately the court concluded, like DOE03, was focused on
“legislative intent” of the Act which DID NOT specifically excluded sexual oriented convicts. Lacking the specific text in statute, the agency promulgated the rules incorrectly by the exclusion. As Michigan proves this missing text in statute is easily added or altered should the state’s legislature opt to do so formally. Coming into compliance with constitutional rights doesn’t necessarily mean better situational disposition for sex offenders.

In my estimation all this guy did was set himself up for certain rejection come parole time. Sure he will get his meeting, and they may even comment on his court victory buy in the end it will be stamped denied.

[Author]

Posts