Preview:

NO. COA11-306
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed:                                                                      1 November  2011
In the Matter of                                                            Guilford County
Mitchell Borden                                                             No.  10 CRS  24618
Appeal  by  the  State  from  order  entered                                13  October                              2010  by
Judge  John  O.  Craig,  III,  in  Guilford  County  Superior  Court.
Heard in the Court of Appeals  15 September  2011.
Roy   Cooper,   Attorney   General,   by   Catherine   F.   Jordan,
Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
No brief filed for petitioner.
THIGPEN, Judge.
                                                                            The  State  of  North  Carolina                                                                                                                 (“the  State”)  appeals  from  an
                                                                            order  terminating  Mitchell  Borden’s                                                                                                          (“Petitioner”)  sex  offender
                                                                                                                     registration  requirement  pursuant  to  N.C.  Gen.  Stat.                                                                                 §          14-
208.12A                                                                     (2009).                                                                                               We  must  determine  whether  the  term                                       “initial
                                                                                                                     county  registration”  as  provided  in  N.C.  Gen.  Stat.                                                                                 §          14-
208.12A(a)  means  the  date  of  initial  county  registration  in
North  Carolina  or  in  any  jurisdiction.    Because  “initial  county
registration”  means  the  date  of  initial  county  registration  in
North  Carolina,  and  Petitioner  has  not  been  registered  as  a  sex




-2-
offender  in  North  Carolina  for  at  least  ten  years,  we  reverse
the trial court’s order.
Petitioner  was  convicted  of                                                 “Rape                                        1”  or                                     “Sexual  Abuse   1st
Degree”1  in  February  1995  in  Fayette  County,  Kentucky.    In  2010,
Petitioner  received  a  written  notice  from  the  Kentucky  Sex
Offender  Registry  stating,                                                   “The  period  of  time  for  which  you
were  required  to  register  as  a  sex  offender  in  the  Commonwealth
of  Kentucky  has  expired.    As  of  June  25,  2010  you  are  no  longer
required  to  register  as  a  sex  offender  with  the  Kentucky  Sex
Offender    Registry    for    the    above    referenced    offense.”
Subsequently,  on  14  September  2010,  Petitioner  filed  a  petition
for  termination  of  sex  offender  registration  in  Guilford  County
Superior  Court.    The  petition  lists  Petitioner’s  date  of  initial
county registration in North Carolina as  1 June  2009.2
1Petitioner indicated on his petition for termination of sex
offender   registration   that   he   was   convicted   of                     “Rape                                        1”;
however,  the  notice  from  the  Kentucky  Sex  Offender  Registry
lists Petitioner’s offense as  “Sexual Abuse  1st Degree.”
2We  note  that  the  date  Petitioner  initially  registered  as  a
sex  offender  in  North  Carolina  is  not  clear  from  the  record.    On
his   petition   for   termination   of   sex   offender   registration,
Petitioner  listed  his                                                        “Date  of  Original  NC  registration”  as   1
June  2009.    Similarly,  at  the  13  October  2010  hearing  before  the
trial  court,   when  asked  how  long  he  had  resided  in  North
Carolina,  Petitioner  told  the  trial  court,  “It  will  be  two  years
in  June,  sir.”     Conversely,  the  State’s  Motion  to  Stay  Order
states  that                                                                   “[a]lthough                                  [Petitioner’s]  petition  indicates  his
date  of  initial  county  registration  in  North  Carolina  was  June




-3-
On                                                                            13  October                                                    2010,  the  trial  court  heard  Petitioner’s
                                                                              petition  for  termination  of  sex  offender  registration.   The
trial  court  reviewed  the  letter  from  the  Kentucky  Sex  Offender
Registry  removing  Petitioner  from  the  registry.    The  trial  court
also  reviewed  Petitioner’s  North  Carolina  criminal  record  and
determined  that                                                              “it  appears  there  were  a  couple  of  charges  but
they  were  dismissed.”    The  trial  court  then  stated,  “I  think  he
would  probably  qualify  to  have  his  petition  granted.”                  In
response, the prosecutor raised the following concern:
[T]he  only  hitch  I  potentially  see  is  the
statute   allows   he   can   petition   after                                10
years   from   the   date   of   initial   county
registration,  which  if  he  states  he’s  only
been  living  here  for  two  years,  his  county
registration  here  wouldn’t  be                                              10  years  old.
However,  it  would  seem  to  me  that  the  fact
that  he’s  off  the  registry  in  Kentucky,  that
would  trump,  but  I’m  just  highlighting  what
I   see   as   the   only   potential   flaw                                  -   or
problem with the statute.
The  trial  court  replied,                                                   “I  would  read  that  to  mean  initial
county  registration  in  any  jurisdiction[.]”     The  trial  court
then  entered  an  order  terminating  Petitioner’s  sex  offender
registration    requirement    and    finding,    inter    alia,    that
Petitioner                                                                    “has  been  subject  to  North  Carolina  registration
1,  2009,  information  in  the  Clerk  of  Court’s  file,  10  CRS  24618,
shows  his  date  of  initial  county  registration  in  North  Carolina
was actually March  1,  2002.”




-4-
requirements  of  Part                                                       2  of  Article                        27A  for  at  least  ten         (10)
years  beginning  with  the  Date  Of  Initial  NC  Registration  above.
Kentucky registration  1995.”    The State appeals from this order.
In  this  case,  we  must  determine  whether  the  North  Carolina
General   Assembly   intended   for                                          “the   date   of   initial   county
registration”  to  mean  the  date  of  initial  county  registration  in
North Carolina or in any jurisdiction.
“Resolution  of  issues  involving  statutory  construction  is
ultimately  a  question  of  law  for  the  courts.     Where  an  appeal
presents  a  question  of  statutory  interpretation,  full  review  is
appropriate,  and  we  review  a  trial  court’s  conclusions  of  law  de
                                                                                                                   novo.”     State  v.  Davison,   201  N.C.  App.   354,                                                  357,   689  S.E.2d
510,                                                                         513                                   (2009)                                             (citations  and  quotation  marks  omitted),  disc.
review denied,  __ N.C.  __,  703 S.E.2d  738  (2010).
We determine matters of statutory construction as follows:
When  the  language  of  a  statute  is  clear  and
without  ambiguity,  it  is  the  duty  of  this
Court  to  give  effect  to  the  plain  meaning  of
the  statute,  and  judicial  construction  of
legislative    intent    is    not    required.
However,  when  the  language  of  a  statute  is
ambiguous,   this   Court   will   determine   the
purpose  of  the  statute  and  the  intent  of  the
legislature   in   its   enactment.                                          Moreover,
when  confronted  with  a  clear  and  unambiguous
statute,    courts    are    without    power    to
interpolate,  or  superimpose,  provisions  and
limitations not contained therein.




-5-
In  re  R.L.C.,                                                             361  N.C.                         287,                                                     292,          643  S.E.2d                                                                  920,   923                                         (2007)
                                                                                                              (internal  citations  and  quotation  marks  omitted).                                                                                                                                                 “The  best
indicia  of  the  legislature’s  intent  are  the  language  of  the
statute  or  ordinance,  the  spirit  of  the  act  and  what  the  act
seeks  to  accomplish.    Moreover,  in  discerning  the  intent  of  the
General  Assembly,  statutes  in  pari  materia  should  be  construed
together  and  harmonized  whenever  possible.”     State  v.  Abshire,
363  N.C.                                                                   322,                              330,                                                     677  S.E.2d   444,                                                                         450    (2009)                                                   (quotations  and
                                                                            quotation  marks  omitted).                                                                                                                                                                  “In  pari  materia  is  defined  as  upon
                                                                                                                                                                                     the  same  matter  or  subject.”    Durham  Herald  Co.,  Inc.  v.  North
                                                                                                                                                                                     Carolina  Low-Level  Radioactive  Waste  Management  Authority,                                                                              110
                                                                                                                                                                                     N.C.  App.  607,  612,  430  S.E.2d  441,  445  (citations  and  quotation
                                                                                                              marks  omitted),  disc.  review  denied,                                                                                                                   334  N.C.                                   619,         435  S.E.2d
334  (1993).
The  purpose  of  the  North  Carolina  Sex  Offender  and  Public
Protection   Registration   Program                                         (“Registration   Program”)   is
outlined in N.C. Gen. Stat.  §  14-208.5  (2009):
[I]t   is   the   purpose   of   this   Article   to
assist  law  enforcement  agencies’  efforts  to
protect  communities  by  requiring  persons  who
are  convicted  of  sex  offenses  or  of  certain
other  offenses  committed  against  minors  to
register  with  law  enforcement  agencies,  to
require  the  exchange  of  relevant  information
about  those  offenders  among  law  enforcement
agencies,  and  to  authorize  the  access  to
necessary   and   relevant   information   about




-6-
those  offenders  to  others  as  provided  in
this Article.
See  also  Abshire,                                                           363  N.C.  at                                                  330,   677  S.E.2d  at   450   (stating
“[t]he   registration   program   was   designed   to   assist   law
enforcement  agencies  and  the  public  in  knowing  the  whereabouts
of  sex  offenders  and  in  locating  them  when  necessary”).     With
the   creation   of   this   program,   the   legislature   explicitly
recognized   that                                                             “sex   offenders   often   pose   a   high   risk   of
engaging   in   sex   offenses   even   after   being   released   from
incarceration  or  commitment  and  that  protection  of  the  public
from  sex  offenders  is  of  paramount  governmental  interest.”    N.C.
Gen.  Stat.                                                                   §  14-208.5.    Furthermore,  the  legislature  recognized
that  individuals  who  commit  certain  types  of  offenses  against
minors,                                                                       “such  as  kidnapping,  pose  significant  and  unacceptable
threats  to  the  public  safety  and  welfare  of  the  children  in  this
State  and  that  the  protection  of  those  children  is  of  great
governmental interest.”    Id.
The  Registration  Program  requires  the  following  persons  to
register:
A  person  who  is  a  State  resident  and  who  has
a reportable conviction3  shall be required to
3The  definition  of                                                          “reportable  conviction”  includes                             “[a]
final  conviction  in  another  state  of  an  offense,  which  if
committed  in  this  State,  is  substantially  similar  to  an  offense
against  a  minor  or  a  sexually  violent  offense  as  defined  by  this




-7-
maintain  registration  with  the  sheriff  of
the  county  where  the  person  resides.    If  the
person  moves  to  North  Carolina  from  outside
this  State,  the  person  shall  register  within
three    business    days    of    establishing
residence  in  this  State,  or  whenever  the
person  has  been  present  in  the  State  for                              15
days, whichever comes first.
N.C.  Gen.  Stat.                                                            §                             14-208.7(a)                                        (2009).             “Registration  shall  be
maintained  for  a  period  of  at  least  30  years  following  the  date
of  initial  county  registration  unless  the  person,  after  10  years
of  registration,  successfully  petitions  the  superior  court  to
shorten  his  or  her  registration  time  period  under  G.S.               14-
208.12A.”    Id.    N.C. Gen. Stat.  §  14-208.12A(a) states:
Ten  years  from  the  date  of  initial  county
registration,  a  person  required  to  register
under  this  Part  may  petition  the  superior
court   in   the   district   where   the   person
resides                                                                      to                            terminate                                          the                 30-year
registration  requirement  if  the  person  has
not  been  convicted  of  a  subsequent  offense
requiring registration under this Article.
(Emphasis added).
Considering  the  provisions  of  the  Registration  Program  in
pari  materia,  we  conclude  the  legislature  intended  for  “initial
section,  or  a  final  conviction  in  another  state  of  an  offense
that  requires  registration  under  the  sex  offender  registration
                                                                             statutes  of  that  state.”                                                      N.C.  Gen.  Stat.                                   §   14-208.6(4)(b)
                                                                                                           (2009).    Here,  Petitioner  was  convicted  of                       “Rape                               1”  or           “Sexual
Abuse                                                                                                      1st  Degree”  in  Kentucky  in                                         1995   and  was  required  to
register  as  a  sex  offender  in  Kentucky;  thus,  Petitioner’s  1995
Kentucky  conviction  is  a  reportable  conviction  under  the  North
Carolina Registration Program.




-8-
county  registration”  to  mean  initial  county  registration  in
North  Carolina.                                                              “[T]he  twin  aims  of  the  North  Carolina  Sex
Offender   and   Public   Protection   Registration   Program,                [are]
public  safety  and  protection[.]”    State  v.  Bryant,  359  N.C.  554,
560,                                                                          614  S.E.2d                                                        479,                483                  (2005)   (citation  omitted).     Allowing
registered   offenders   to   be   removed   from   the   sex   offender
registry  without  being  on  the  registry  for  at  least  ten  years  in
North  Carolina  contradicts  the  intent  of  the  statutes  to  protect
the  public,  maintain  public  safety,  and  assist  law  enforcement
agencies  and  the  public  in  knowing  the  whereabouts  of  sex
offenders.     See  id.;  Abshire,                                            363  N.C.  at                                                      330,                677  S.E.2d  at
450.
Additionally,  construing                                                     “initial  county  registration”  to
mean  initial  county  registration  in  North  Carolina  is  consistent
with  the  definitions  provided  in  the  Registration  Program.    For
instance,  N.C.  Gen.  Stat.                                                  §                                                                  14-208.6  defines   “county  registry”
as                                                                            “the  information  compiled  by  the  sheriff  of  a  county  in
compliance  with  this  Article”  and  “sheriff”  as  “the  sheriff  of  a
county  in  this  State.”    N.C.  Gen.  Stat.  §  14-208.6(1b)  and  (7).
These  definitions  demonstrate  the  legislature’s  intent  to  define
“initial   county   registration”   as   a   sex   offender’s   initial
registration with a sheriff of a county in this State.




-9-
In   this   case,   the   trial   court   incorrectly   interpreted
“initial    county    registration”    to    mean                             “initial    county
registration  in  any  jurisdiction.”     While  Petitioner  had  been
registered  as  a  sex  offender  in  Kentucky  for  at  least  ten  years,
the  record  shows  he  was  not  registered  in  North  Carolina  for  at
least ten years.4    Thus, the trial court erred when it terminated
Petitioner’s                                                                  sex                  offender   registration   requirement.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order.
REVERSED.
Judges GEER and STROUD concur.
4Although  it  is  not  clear  from  the  record  when  Petitioner
initially  registered  in  North  Carolina,  using  the  earliest  date
in  the  record,  1  March  2002,  Petitioner  has  not  been  registered
in North Carolina for at least ten years.

Download 11-306.pdf

South Carolina Law