ILNews

Sex offender may file to take name off registry

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals determined a convicted sex offender may petition to remove his name from the registry, but he filed his petition in the wrong court.

In Glenn E. Brogan v. State of Indiana, No. 57A04-0910-CR-592, Glenn Brogan appealed the denial of his motion by Noble Superior Court to remove his name from the state’s sex offender registry. Brogan was convicted in late 1994 of two counts of child molestation in the county. At the time of his conviction, he wasn’t required to register as a sex offender. When he filed his motion in 2009 in Noble County to remove his name, he was incarcerated in the New Castle Correctional Facility for failing to register in Huntington County in 2008.

The Noble Superior Court denied his motion because it ruled it didn’t have authority or jurisdiction to remove his name.

The appellate court had to navigate the law following the Indiana Supreme Court’s ruling in Wallace v. State, 905 N.E.2d 371 (Ind. 2009), and recently enacted legislation entailing how a registered sex offender may remove his or her name from the registry to determine in what forum Brogan should seek relief under Wallace.

The COA judges determined Brogan appropriately presented his request to be removed from the sex offender registry in his motion. Under a recent provision to Indiana Code Section 11-8-8-22, a sex offender can petition to have his name removed from the registry and the provision was made applicable in 2007 if there has been a change in federal or state law after June 30, 2007. The judges deemed Wallace such a change in law; they also noted the 2010 amendment to the statute authorizing an offender to raise an ex post facto claim.

The appellate court agreed that Noble Superior Court wasn’t the proper forum for granting Brogan relief. Under the 2010 legislation, the General Assembly dictated that the petition should be filed where the offender lives, spends the most time, works, or attends school. Only if none of those apply should the petition be filed in the county where the offender was originally convicted. Brogan should file in the county in which he resides.

“One thing is patently clear from the Wallace decision. Brogan is entitled to have his name removed from any sex offender registry which has resulted from his 1994 convictions in Noble County,” wrote Senior Judge Patrick Sullivan.

Judge Michael Barnes agreed with his colleagues in a separate opinion that Brogan needs to refile his petition in a different county.

“That determination, however, should be made by the trial court if Brogan refiles his motion pursuant to Indiana Code Section 11-8-8-22,” wrote Judge Barnes. “I think it is premature at this time to hold that Brogan is entitled to have his name removed from the sex offender registry.”
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • registry
    I am a paralegal in Indiana. I have been working with a good friend of mine who was convicted in 2008 of a class c felony sex offense. He was sentenced to 8 yrs. & 10 yrs. On registry. Upon release in Indiana, different county than conviction he was on 10 yr. registry. When he moved back to county of conviction in Indiana, he was placed on lifetime registry. If we cannot challenge registry, we will challenge constitutionality of conviction. State cannot have their cake and eat it too.
  • REMOVE NAME
    MY SON MADE A STUPID MISTAKE WHEN HE WAS 17 YRS. OLD AND HAS BEEN CONVICTED TEN OR MORE YEARS AGO. HIS NAME IS ON SEX OFFENDERS REGISTRY. HE HAS BEEN DEPORTED 3 YEARS AGO BECAUSE OF HIS CRIME. HE HAS NOW A FAMILY WITH 5 CHILDRENS AND A GOOD AND DESCENT JOB TO SUPPORT HIS FAMILY. HE NOW IS CONCERNED ABOUT HIS NAME ON THE SEX OFFENDERS THAT MAY CAUSE HIS JOB. IN WHAT WAY THAT HE CAN REMOVE HIS NAME.
  • getting off the registry
    how does a person get off the registry. when i was convicted i was ordered to registor for ten years and then right before i was supposed to stop i was told that i had to register for life.
    • Spouse
      In doing research to get my husband off the registry I have been going thru the ACLU. They did advise us that once we got releaf that if we left the state that he would be bound the federal SORNA act and have to register again. Best bet move back to Indiana and live your life. So as much as I hate to say it Iowa is correct in the ruling dont mean anything to them.
    • Still Persercuted
      I recently had my name removed from the registry by a Indiana Judge early this year also; however Iowa, the state I moved to informed me that the Indiana Juges' Order(the convicting state)means nothing here and that I must still register for life!! Can I get some feed back on how to proceed and make them pay?!!!

      Post a comment to this story

      COMMENTS POLICY
      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
       
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
       
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
       
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
       
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
       

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      Sponsored by

      facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

      Indiana State Bar Association

      Indianapolis Bar Association

      Evansville Bar Association

      Allen County Bar Association

      Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

      facebook
      ADVERTISEMENT
      Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
      1. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

      2. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

      3. The story that you have shared is quite interesting and also the information is very helpful. Thanks for sharing the article. For more info: http://www.treasurecoastbailbonds.com/

      4. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

      5. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

      ADVERTISEMENT