Miller v. Commonwealth

88 Va. Cir. 177, 2014 Va. Cir. LEXIS 17
CourtFairfax County Circuit Court
DecidedApril 14, 2014
DocketCase No. CL-2013-18591
StatusPublished

This text of 88 Va. Cir. 177 (Miller v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Fairfax County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Miller v. Commonwealth, 88 Va. Cir. 177, 2014 Va. Cir. LEXIS 17 (Va. Super. Ct. 2014).

Opinion

By Judge Robert J. Smith

This matter comes before the Court on a Petition for Removal of Name from Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry Pursuant to Virginia Code § 9.1-910.

Background

On November 8, 1996, David Miller pleaded guilty and was convicted of one count of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). Petitioner served thirteen months in jail for this offense and completed three years of probation. At the time of his conviction, Petitioner did not register with Virginia’s Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry (“Registry”) because his conviction was not one that required registration at the time.

On or around November 19, 1998, Petitioner received a letter from his Probation Officer, informing him that he would have to register with the Registry due to a recent amendment to the Virginia Registry statute. 18 U.S.C. § 4042 was amended on November 26, 1997 and effective one year after enactment. Petitioner signed and submitted a registration application on December 2, 1998. Starting on that date, Petitioner believed that his name was included on the Registry.

Although he complied with the directive of his probation officer, on December 8, 1998, Petitioner, by counsel, wrote an appeal to the Virginia Department of State Police (“Department”) requesting that Petitioner’s name be removed from the Registry because “the federal offense that [Petitioner] was convicted of is not 'substantially similar’ to any Virginia offense for which registration is required.” Letter from Michael Nachmanoff, counsel [178]*178for Petitioner, to Lieutenant Thomas W. Turner, Va. Dept, of State Police (Dec. 8, 1998). Petitioner’s counsel requested that Petitioner’s name be removed from the Registiy. Id.

On December 14, 1998, Lieutenant Turner of the Department of State Police wrote back to Petitioner’s counsel stating that he agreed that Petitioner’s federal offense did not qualify as an offense requiring registration. Letter from Lieutenant Thomas W. Turner, Va. Dept, of State Police, to Michael Nachmanoff, counsel for Petitioner (Dec. 14, 1998). The letter did not indicate whether Petitioner’s name was then included on the Registry, nor did it specify that Petitioner’s name would be removed from the registry because of this appeal. Id. However, since Petitioner had submitted all paperwork that he believed was necessary for including his name on the Registiy and since Petitioner believed his name was currently listed on the Registry, he assumed that the receipt of Lieutenant Turner’s letter meant that his appeal was successful and his name would be removed from the Registry.

On October 4, 2007, nearly a decade later, Petitioner received another letter from the Department of State Police, notifying him that he was required to register for the Registiy because of a recent amendment to the Virginia Registry statute. 18 U.S.C. § 4042 was amended on July 27, 2006. Letter from Lieutenant William J. Reed, Jr., Va. Dept, of State Police, to David C. Miller (Oct. 4, 2007).

On November 3, 2007, Petitioner, by counsel, responded, stating that he, again, did not interpret this most recent revision to require Petitioner to register. Letter from Manuel Capsalis, counsel for Petitioner, to Lieutenant William J. Reed, Jr., Va. Dept, of State Police (Nov. 3,2007). On November 13, 2007, Lieutenant William J. Reed wrote to Petitioner’s counsel stating that “a statutory change was made during the last Virginia General Assembly to include all offenders who are required to register in the jurisdiction of their conviction that choose to reside, be employed, or received education in Virginia.” Letter from Lieutenant William J. Reed, Jr., Va. Dept, of State Police, to Manuel Capsalis, counsel for Petitioner (Nov. 13, 2007). Based on Lieutenant Reed’s letter, Petitioner completed and submitted registration documents on December 7, 2007. He is registered to this day.

On January 31,2014, Petitioner appeared before this Court on a Petition for Removal of Name from Registry. Petitioner argues that it has been at least fifteen years since the date of his “initial registration” on December 8, 1998. Petitioner states that he has completed all court ordered treatment, counseling, and restitution. The Commonwealth argues that the Petitioner was never added to the Registiy in 1998. Furthermore, the Commonwealth states that the only document the Registry has on file relating to the Petitioner’s 1998 attempt to register is the signature page of the registration form. Thus, the Commonwealth argues that Petitioner’s initial registration was not in 1998 but in 2007 and, therefore, he has not met the statute’s [179]*179requirements for removal of his name from the Registry. The Court took this matter under advisement.

Issue Presented

The issue before the Court is whether the Petitioner’s submission of all necessaiy documents in 1998 is sufficient to constitute initial registration, as required by Virginia Code § 9.1-910 for removal of the Petitioner’s name from the Sex Offender Registry, even though, after his submission of necessary documents in 1998, the Department of State Police told him that he was not required to register.

Standard of Review

The Virginia statutes governing Registration in the Sex Offender Registry and Removal from the Registry states, in pertinent part:

Registration Procedures. B. Every person required to register shall register in person within three days of his release from confinement in a state, local, or juvenile correctional facility, in a state civil commitment program for sexually violent predators or, if a sentence of confinement is not imposed, within three days of suspension of the sentence or in the case of a juvenile of disposition. A person required to register shall register, and as part of the registration shall submit to be photographed, submit to have a sample of his blood, saliva, or tissue taken for DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) analysis and submission to the DNA databank to determine identification characteristics specific to the person,... submit to have his fingerprints and palm prints taken, provide information regarding his place of employment, and provide motor vehicle, watercraft, and aircraft registration information for all motor vehicles, watercraft, and aircraft owned by him.

Va. Code § 9.1-903(B).

Removal of name and information from Registry. A. Any person required to register, other than a person who has been convicted of any (i) sexually violent offense, (ii) two or more offenses for which registration is required, (iii) a violation of former § 18.2-67.2:1, or (iv) murder, may petition the circuit court in which he was convicted or the circuit court in the jurisdiction where he then resides for removal of his name and all identifying information from the Registry. A petition may not be filed earlier than 15 years, or 25 years for violations of [180]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

McCabe v. Com.
650 S.E.2d 508 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 2007)
Conyers v. MARTIAL ARTS WORLD OF RICHMOND
639 S.E.2d 174 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
88 Va. Cir. 177, 2014 Va. Cir. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-commonwealth-vaccfairfax-2014.