Summary
affirming an Appellate Division decision holding that a Megan's Law provision does not apply retroactively upon finding "no statement of legislative intent, express or implied, that [ N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(g) ] should be applied retroactively"
Summary of this case from State v. BaileyOpinion
A-38 September Term 2018 081737
10-29-2019
In the MATTER OF Registrant G.H. In the Matter of Registrant G.A.
Emily R. Anderson, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant State of New Jersey (Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney; Emily R. Anderson, Trenton, of counsel and on the briefs). Stephanie A. Lutz, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for respondents G.H. and G.A. (Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney; Stephanie A. Lutz, of counsel and on the briefs). Katherine Haas argued the cause for amicus curiae American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Foundation, attorneys; Katherine Haas, Liza Weisberg, Alexander Shalom, and Jeanne LoCicero, on the brief). Michael C. Woyce, Ringwood, argued the cause for amicus curiae Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey (Murphy & Woyce, attorneys; Michael C. Woyce, on the brief).
Emily R. Anderson, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant State of New Jersey (Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney; Emily R. Anderson, Trenton, of counsel and on the briefs).
Stephanie A. Lutz, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for respondents G.H. and G.A. (Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney; Stephanie A. Lutz, of counsel and on the briefs).
Katherine Haas argued the cause for amicus curiae American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Foundation, attorneys; Katherine Haas, Liza Weisberg, Alexander Shalom, and Jeanne LoCicero, on the brief).
Michael C. Woyce, Ringwood, argued the cause for amicus curiae Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey (Murphy & Woyce, attorneys; Michael C. Woyce, on the brief).
PER CURIAM The judgment of the Appellate Division in In re Registrant G.H., 455 N.J. Super. 515, 190 A.3d 1059 (App. Div. 2018), in which the court concluded that N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(g) (subsection (g) ) of Megan's Law does not apply retroactively, is affirmed.
Registrants G.H. and G.A. both pleaded guilty to offenses that required them to register for life under Megan's Law. See N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2. At the time of their pleas, they would have been eligible to apply for relief from lifetime registration years later, under N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(f) (subsection (f) ), if they did not commit an offense within fifteen years of their convictions or their release from jail, and if a judge found they were "not likely to pose a threat to the safety of others."
On January 8, 2002, after the entry of both pleas, the Legislature enacted subsection (g). The new law went into effect immediately and barred registrants like G.H. and G.A., who had been convicted of more than one sex offense, of aggravated sexual assault, or of sexual assault, as defined, from applying to terminate their registration requirements under subsection (f). N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(g), (f).
Like the Appellate Division, we find no statement of legislative intent, express or implied, that subsection (g) should be applied retroactively. G.H., 455 N.J. Super. at 531-34, 190 A.3d 1059 ; see also James v. N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co., 216 N.J. 552, 563, 83 A.3d 70 (2014). Nor do we find that subsection (g) was curative, or that the parties' expectations warranted retroactive application. G.H., 455 N.J. Super. at 531 n.5, 190 A.3d 1059 ; see also James, 216 N.J. at 563, 83 A.3d 70.
The judgment of the Appellate Division is therefore affirmed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court to determine whether either registrant qualifies for relief under subsection (f).
CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER and JUSTICES LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, PATTERSON, FERNANDEZ-VINA, SOLOMON, and TIMPONE join in this opinion.