State v. Pearrow

2011 MT 18, 2011 MT 19, 248 P.3d 799, 359 Mont. 177, 2011 Mont. LEXIS 19
CourtMontana Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 14, 2011
DocketDA 10-0282
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 2011 MT 18 (State v. Pearrow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Pearrow, 2011 MT 18, 2011 MT 19, 248 P.3d 799, 359 Mont. 177, 2011 Mont. LEXIS 19 (Mo. 2011).

Opinions

JUSTICE NELSON

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

¶1 Richard Pearrow appeals an order of the District Court for the Eighteenth Judicial District, Gallatin County, finding him guilty of failing to register as a sexual offender. We affirm.

¶2 Pearrow raises two issues on appeal:

¶3 1. Whether the District Court erred in denying Pearrow’s motion to dismiss the Information on the grounds that the statutes requiring sexual offenders to register are unconstitutionally vague as applied to Pearrow.

¶4 2. Whether the District Court erred in denying Pearrow’s motion to dismiss the Information on the grounds that the statutes requiring sexual offenders to register violated Pearrow’s substantive due process rights.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶5 Pearrow was convicted of a sexual offense in the State of Florida in January 2000. He subsequently moved to Belgrade, Montana. In February 2006, Pearrow went to the Bozeman Police Department and signed a Montana Department of Justice Sexual and Violent Offender Registration Form (the Registration Form) in compliance with Montana’s Sexual or Violent Offender Registration Act (the Act) (Title 46, chapter 23, part 5, MCA). On the Registration Form, Pearrow indicated that his physical address was 510 Yellowstone Avenue, Belgrade, Montana.

¶6 The second page of the Registration Form states at the top: “Unless otherwise noted, the following statements reflect the requirements as stated in the Montana Codes Annotated, 46-23-501 et. al.” The Registration Form then sets forth ten statements Pearrow was required to read and initial, including the following:

I must give written notice within 10 days of changing my address1 to the agency with which I last registered. A Post Office box address is not sufficient unless a physical address is also provided [179]*179or, if no physical address is available, complete directions to my place of residence. [Emphasis added.]

In addition, at the bottom of the second page of the Registration Form, directly above Pearrow’s signature, is the following statement: “I understand my duty to register and that failure to do so is a criminal offense.”

¶7 Pearrow’s employment requires extensive travel. He contracts for three international seminar companies and gives computer workshops all over the country and sometimes overseas. He is not required to notify law enforcement when he is traveling for business.

¶8 Pearrow ended his residence at the 510 Yellowstone Avenue address on or about November 6, 2008. On November 17, 2008, Pearrow began renting a space for his RV at the Meridian RV Resort in Apache Junction, Arizona. Six days later, on November 23, 2008, Pearrow wrote a letter to the Belgrade Police Department informing them of a change in his living situation. Pearrow stated in his letter that since he traveled extensively for business, it did not make sense to pay rent on a residence he rarely used. Therefore, he had terminated his rental agreement for the Yellowstone Avenue apartment. Pearrow also disclosed that his new address was for the Belgrade UPS store, which would forward his mail to him periodically. Pearrow stated that he would maintain his car, RV, and business registration in Montana. He did not, however, disclose that he was currently living in Arizona in his RV.

¶9 Upon receipt of Pearrow’s letter, Officer Dave Keen with the Belgrade Police Department sent an e-mail to Dawn Spencer at the Montana Department of Justice stating the circumstances as outlined by Pearrow in his letter and inquiring whether Pearrow needed to register as a transient under the Act. After further investigation by Montana law enforcement officials revealed that Pearrow was living in Arizona in his RV and not in Belgrade, the State filed an Information charging Pearrow with knowingly failing to keep his sexual offender registration current. The Information, filed on December 24,2008, charged Pearrow with violating § 46-23-507, MCA. Pearrow moved to dismiss the Information on the basis that (1) the Affidavit of Probable Cause submitted by the State in support of its Motion for Leave to File Information was insufficient to establish the probable cause necessary to grant leave to file the Information, and (2) the statute requiring him to update his sexual offender registration upon his change of residence was unconstitutionally vague as applied to his situation.

[180]*180¶10 The District Court held a hearing on Pearrow’s motion on July 28, 2009, after which the court denied the motion. Pearrow subsequently pled nolo contendere to felony failure to register as a sexual offender in violation of § 46-23-507, MCA. The District Court sentenced him to a two-year commitment to the Department of Corrections, all suspended with conditions; designated him a Level I sexual offender; and required him to register as a sexual offender according to statute.

¶11 Pearrow does not challenge any part of his sentence on appeal. Rather, he challenges the constitutionality of § 46-23-507, MCA, claiming that it is unconstitutionally vague as applied to him because it failed to inform him that the requirement to provide a “physical address” (as specified in the Registration Form, but not in the statute) could not be met by providing the physical address of a business from which he rented a mail box. He also challenges the constitutionality of § 46-23-504, MCA, on the grounds that it violates his right to substantive due process.

DISCUSSION

¶12 Notwithstanding the fact that a good portion of Pearrow’s complaint is actually with the language in the Registration Form and not the statutes, thereby making his constitutionality arguments ineffective, we conclude that the dispositive issue in this case is whether Pearrow filed his change of address in a timely manner.

¶13 At the time Pearrow signed the Registration Form in 2006, § 46-23-505, MCA (2005), provided the following:

If an offender required to register under this part has a change of address, the offender shall within 10 days of the change give written notification of the new address to the agency with whom the offender last registered or, if the offender was initially registered under 46-23-504(l)(b), to the department and to the chief of police of the municipality or sheriff of the county from which the offender is moving. [Emphasis added.]

Consequently, the Registration Form also provided that Pearrow must give written notice within ten days of changing his address. In 2007, § 46-23-505, MCA, was amended to provide that within three business days of a change of residence, an offender must appear in person and give notification of the change to the registration agency with whom the offender last registered. And, § 46-23-507, MCA, the actual penalty statute under which Pearrow was charged, has provided since 1997 without amendment, that a sexual or violent offender is in violation of the Act if the offender knowingly fails to register, verify registration, [181]*181or keep registration current.

¶14 Although there is some disagreement between Pearrow and the State as to which version of § 46-23-505, MCA, should apply in this case, that question is moot as Pearrow did not comply with either version of this statute. As already indicated, Pearrow ended his residence at the 510 Yellowstone Avenue address on or about November 6, 2008.

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

Related

State v. Hardground
2019 MT 14 (Montana Supreme Court, 2019)
Montagna v. State
2014 MT 228N (Montana Supreme Court, 2014)
State v. Pearrow
2011 MT 18 (Montana Supreme Court, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2011 MT 18, 2011 MT 19, 248 P.3d 799, 359 Mont. 177, 2011 Mont. LEXIS 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-pearrow-mont-2011.