Garnett Lloyd v. United States
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Securities Privacy
Whether SORNA's definition of 'sex offense' includes federal offenses not listed in § 20911(5)(A)(iii)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED For a criminal offense to require registration under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SSORNA”), 34 U.S.C. § 20901 ef seq., it must fit the definition of “sex offense” in 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A). A “sex offense” is a federal offense listed in 34 U.S.C.§ 20911(5)(A) (iii), a military offense listed in 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A) (iv), “a criminal offense that has an element involving a sexual act or sexual contact with another,” 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A)(ji), or “a criminal offense that is a specified offense against a minor,” 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A) (i). A “criminal offense” is, in turn, a “[s|tate, local, tribal, foreign, ... military, ... or other criminal offense.” 34 U.S.C. § 20911(6). The Petitioner was convicted of cyberstalking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2)(B), which is not one of the federal offenses listed in 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A) (iii). Nevertheless he was ordered to register as a sex offender under SORNA because the lower courts, applying a non-categorical, approach to interpret the statutory text, concluded that his offense is “a criminal offense that is a specified offense against a minor.” The questions presented are: I. Whether the definition of “sex offense” in 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A) includes federal offenses other than those listed in 34 U.S.C. § 20911(5)(A) (iii). II. Whether courts must apply a categorical approach or approach to determine if an offense is “a specified offense against a minor” under 34 USS.C. § 20911(5)(A) ii) and 34 U.S.C. § 20911(7). i III. In answering the second question, whether courts must afford deference under Chevron, U.S.A, Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council, Inc. 467 U.S. 837 (1984), to the Attorney General’s interpretation of the statute in the National Guidelines for Sex Offender Registration and Notification, 73 Fed. Reg. 38,030 (July 2, 2008), otherwise known as the SMART Guidelines. ii INTERESTED PARTIES There are no patties to the proceeding other than those named in the caption of the case.