CA- Out-of-state offenders need not register

2-17-2008 California:

A federal judge's decision to dismiss an indictment against a Brownsville man, charged with failing to register as a sex offender, got a reception from residents as chilly as the patches of snow that line roads in the foothill community.

Nedde Max Murphy, Jr., 41, convicted in Nevada in 1988 of criminal lewdness with a child under 14, failed to register when moving from Idaho, according to a criminal complaint filed in federal court in Sacramento.

Lawrence K. Karlton, a federal judge in Sacramento, ruled that Congress overstepped its authority in a 2006 law requiring sex offenders to update their registration when they relocate to another state.

Federal prosecutors have appealed Karlton's ruling and a hearing in U.S. District Court in Sacramento is set Wednesday.

The judge's ruling isn't right, said Brownsville resident John Slazas and most others interviewed Monday.

A remote, rural region like the foothills provides "perfect prey for a predator," Slazas, 47, said in supporting the law requiring sex offenders to register when moving from one state to another.

"I want him out of here," Slazas said of Murphy.

"Our judicial system is falling apart," he added of the judge's decision. "What's his motivation in making a ruling like that?"

Another Brownsville resident said Murphy's residence, about a mile from the youth center in the community, would be passed by teens on their way to the center.

"That's crazy," the resident, who declined to give her name, said of the judge's ruling.

Brownsville resident Bonnie Godden, 65, said the judge's decision to dismiss the indictment "smacks of the ACLU" and would allow sex offenders to avoid registration merely by moving from one state to another.

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) has no involvement in this case.

Cynthia D'Orazi, 42, took issue with the federal ruling as well. The requirement that sex offenders register "should follow them where they go" when moving, she said.

Kay Stadtman, who said she met Murphy at a yard sale she held last summer, later learned of his sex offender status when he was arrested in December for failing to register in California after his move from Idaho.

"I was kind of shocked," Stadtman said about the status of Murphy, who lives about a block away. Stadtman said Murphy should be required to register.

The criminal complaint filed against Murphy in December in federal court recounts a deputy U.S. Marshall learning that Murphy might be receiving disability benefits from the state of California. Murphy had registered in Idaho in 2007 as a sex offender but had not done so in California, according to the complaint.

In November, the marshal went to Brownsville where the postmaster said she'd seen Murphy a week earlier in the post office. The marshal said the Yuba County Sheriff's Department told him Murphy had not tried to register here as a sex offender.

A person who said she knows Murphy, but declined to be identified, said Murphy hasn't repeated any crime since his 1988 conviction in Nevada.

She said she understands the reactions of residents who don't know Murphy.

"If I didn't know him, I'd be pretty pissed he's here," said the woman, who believes he should register as a sex offender.

Murphy is not a predator or a threat to Brownsville residents, including those traveling to the youth center, she said.

The ruling made by Judge Karlton was one of two made last week related to sex offender registrations, including the one made in the Murphy case.

In the other case Karlton noted that those subject to law have often committed the most reprehensible of crimes — "making it difficult to give their claims the dispassionate analysis the law requires."

"Nonetheless, it is the sworn duty of judges to do so..." he wrote.
..News Source.. by Ryan McCarthy/Appeal-Democrat