Addition of sex offender conditions to probation

In State v. Hicks, decided May 3, the S.C. Supreme Court denied Hicks’ appeal from the addition of sex offender conditions to his probation on grounds that there were two additional grounds for HIcks’ revocation that his attorney did not appeal.
Hicks pled guilty to ABHAN (assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature) and was sentenced to ten years suspended to time served, five years probation, and registration as a sex offender. His probation was later revoked 90 days and the court ordered that Probation, Pardon, and Parole’s sex offender conditions would be added as conditions of his probation.
The sex offender conditions of probation are burdensome and extreme, and I don’t see where a court can or should add such terms at a later term of court, essentially modifying the defendant’s sentence after the fact. The defendant here was sentenced in 2005, the probation department added the sex offender conditions in January 2006, and the Circuit Court added them to the defendant’s sentence in May 2006.
The Court of Appeals did not answer the question, holding that the issue of the addition of the sex offender conditions at the revocation hearing was not preserved because it was not ruled upon by the Circuit Court; and here the Supreme Court has also dodged the question by holding that they cannot hear the appeal because defendant did not raise all grounds for revocation.
I believe, because of the extreme requirements in the sex offender conditions of probation, that this is not different than the case of State v. Davis, where the Court of Appeals reversed the Circuit Court’s addition of the sex offender registry to the defendant’s sentence during a probation revocation hearing – although the sentencing judge can order order placement on the sex offender registry for good cause following a conviction of ABHAN, a probation revocation judge at a later time does not have the authority to modify the sentence and add sex offender registry as a condition.

4 Responses to “Addition of sex offender conditions to probation

  • ABHAN is a registerable offense in South Carolina? Its amazing how the sex offender registry has turned into a “bad offense registry” with crimes that do not have sexual components. It seems the original purpose, providing notice of where sex offenders reside to the public, has changed. The registry and these types of conditions have become another tool for judges, probation and parole to impose sanction on a person which they cannot meet. Therefore, giving reasons to lock the person up again. While the registry is viewed as remedial and not “punishment”, it sets people up for further “punishment” by imposing impractial conditions.

    • Kolbeck: ” Its amazing how the sex offender registry has turned into a “bad offense registry” with crimes that do not have sexual components.”

      Not amazing at all really considering that something as heinous as public urination can require someone to register. Arizona, California, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire , Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah and Vermont all have Pee-nal codes.

  • ABHAN is a registerable offense in South Carolina? Its amazing how the sex offender registry has turned into a “bad offense registry” with crimes that do not have sexual components. It seems the original purpose, providing notice of where sex offenders reside to the public, has changed. The registry and these types of conditions have become another tool for judges, probation and parole to impose drastic conditions on individuals. While the registry is viewed as remedial and not “punishment”, these drastic conditions set people up for further “punishment” by being nearly impossible to abide by.

  • kris perk
    9 years ago

    HOW THE MEDIA AND LEGISLATORS DESTROYED THE SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY IN ILLINOIS How this makes all our children vulnerable to predatotors
    I am on the sex offender registry for having a consensual relationship with my now wife, in 1998. She is 27 years of age today!!!We now have two beautiful children.There is an answer to the question “,why cant the police watch sexual predators better and prevent future horrors.”?
    The answer is not what people want to hear as this subject is driven by hysteria and knee jerk legislation to appease a roman colliseum, mob type mentality.
    There are thousands and thousands of consensual,statutory cases on the sex offender registry in each state,Plus juvenille cases(19 year olds with 15 year olds) ,public nudity,exposure,prostitution,indecent behavior,public peeing etc.
    There simply are not enough police to monitor all these cases. Because the states wont interject risk assessment hearings, all sex offender registrants are lumped together and there simply isnt enough police power to monitor all registrants,nor should they.!!!!!!!!
    I have been on television numerous times on this subject. I know what i did is socially taboo and illegal, yet i am not a threat to children or women.To put me next to a child rapist on this list, is like putting a casual marijuanna smoker ,caught with a bag, in the same arena s a meth lab gangster!!!!!!!.
    Partial List of police time waisted on my case:
    :Ive been on this list for 11 plus years,ive had 100 plus probation appointments,40 plus home checks,done over 17 police station check ins,police monitoring our home frequently,pulled over (with my wife,both of us in cuffs)11 plus times etc.Stickers on our home on Halloween,lost 6 jobs,various acts of vigilantism etc.
    We have had DCFS called on us 3 times by an anonynous neighbor because im on the list and have had numerous threatening calls to our home. Addittionally we have had to call the Crestwood Police and bother them numerous times because of suspicious cars in front of our home, snapping pictures,gawking etc.All this police time for one consensual case ,AND WE ARE MARRIED .!!!!
    ( We were married by the same judge who gave me the original misdimeanor,who did not consider me a threat!!! He later helped seal our case to “protect this family and the children” )
    If the public is wondering why law enforcement cant even stop violent registered offenders from re-offending,the answer is that these predators are like a pin hiding in a haystack.The haystack is thousands of non violent cases like mine, that would be removed immediately if risk assessment was employed.
    MEDIA RESPONSIBILITY AND SENSATIONALISM
    No media figure has the courage to tell it straight: time to weed out the predators from the registrants who simply broke the law. Then the police can triple their time up on monitoring violent offenders.( Its not the police who make these laws its the congressional and Governor wannabes,who want to appear to look “tough on crime.”,yet have no clue of the ramifications of their legislation on families nor care.)
    Its always the same pattern, the media likes to cry wolf,get the public excited (for sensationalism)and then the lawmakers legislate an already blotted system ,while the real predators know this and use it in their hunting techniques as camoflague.
    my name is Mark Perk, l Google in” Lets seperate the Misguided from the monsters” Eric Zorn ,Chicago tribune. This is our story.
    our daughter is 4 years old,ironically I am as scared as anyone of true sexual predators. The story of any young child raped is heart breaking ,frightening yet tragically will happen time and time again. No one has the courage to seperate the wheat from the chaff.or the “misguided from the monsters”. Mark and Kri

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *