Sex offender exception debated

SANTA FE (KRQE) - Sex offenders convicted in another state must register again with the state of if they move to New Mexico.

But on Monday, New Mexico Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments in the case of a man who claimed he didn’t have to register because he was convicted of a California crime that doesn’t exactly translate into New Mexico law.

“It’s a matter of fairness,” said Melissa Hill, a defense attorney who practices in both New Mexico and California. “How can you punish somebody for not registering in New Mexico when our statute says that the offense has to match a conviction under our state law?”

Bruce Hall, 65, was convicted in 1999 of the misdemeanor offense of annoying or molesting a child in California. According to court documents, he touched the genitals of three boys.

Hall moved to Las Cruces in the early 2000s and was arrested by police in 2008 for failing to register as a sex offender, which is a felony.

A District Court judge found him guilty of the charge and Hall later served time in jail. However, the New Mexico Court of Appeals overturned the conviction.

That’s because the California law doesn’t require touching for a conviction, while the law cited by New Mexico prosecutors as being closest to what Hall did – known as criminal sexual contact of a minor – requires touching under New Mexico law.

However, New Mexico’s Supreme Court justices indicated today that the Appeals Court interpretation may have been too narrow.

“The primary intent is to protect children from sexual predators in New Mexico and California, correct?” said Justice Patricio Serna.

The court could rule that the legislative intent of the law – protecting children and the community – may be the most important aspect of it.

“We have to look at the essence of what the offense is to see if it’s the kind of thing that was in the scope of what the legislature intended in New Mexico,” said Chief Justice Charles Daniels. “That is to guard children against sexual predators.”

Even Hall’s defense attorney acknowledged the larger fears.

“Now, I realize that the state has concerns – probably all citizens have a concern – about this creating some form of safe haven for sex offenders,” said Douglas Wood. “I get that.”

Still, Wood told the justices that it’s the legislature’s job to expand the law, not theirs. He also reminded them that they can’t sit as a jury and convict Hall of criminal sexual contact of a minor either.

Barbara Romo, a Sandoval County assistant district attorney who has spent nearly 14 years mainly prosecuting sex crimes against children, said New Mexico’s sex registration law should be changed.

Romo alsos says anyone who is convicted of a sexual offense that requires registration in one state should automatically be required to register in any other state if they move locations.

The Supreme Court justices took Monday’s arguments under advisement and will issue an opinion later.