Supreme Court: 'Forgetting' to register unacceptable for sex offenders

By: KIM CURTIS - Associated Press | Thursday, June 23, 2005 11:14 PM PDT ∞

SAN FRANCISCO -- Simply forgetting to register because of stress is an insufficient excuse for sex offenders, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday in the case of a rapist who showed up late to inform local police of his whereabouts.

Joseph Sorden, 47, who was convicted of forcible rape in 1983, had registered his address every year within five days of his birthday, as required by law.

In 2001, Sorden showed up more than two weeks late because he says he suffered from depression and forgot. At the time, Sorden was having financial trouble, his mother's cancer had spread and he was flying to New York to be with her, he broke up with his girlfriend, the mother of his son was battling over visitation and his 14-year-old dog died, according to court documents.

He voluntarily showed up at the Pacifica police station on Dec. 22, 2001, to register, explaining he had "gotten up that morning, realized he hadn't registered and that he needed to do so."

He was arrested and convicted of willfully failing to update his registration, a felony, and sentenced to 90 days in jail, three years' probation and a $200 fine. The appeals court disagreed, saying Sorden had honestly forgotten and hadn't willfully broken the law. His conviction was overturned in October 2003.

But the state Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that forgetting is a valid excuse only when the sex offender suffers from a "most disabling" and "involuntary condition," like amnesia or Alzheimer's disease.

"Life is difficult for everyone," Justice Janice Brown wrote for the court. "As a society, we have become increasingly aware of how many of our fellow citizens must cope with significant physical and mental disabilities. But cope they do, as best they can, for cope they must. ... It is simply not enough for a defendant to assert a selective impairment that conveniently affects his memory as to registering, but otherwise leaves him largely functional."

Sorden's lawyer, Richard Such, disagreed and pledged to petition the high court for a rehearing.

"He faithfully discharged his obligation many times in the past," Such said. "As soon as he remembered, he ran down to the station to do it."

A message left for the deputy attorney general who prosecuted the case was not immediately returned Thursday.

In a partially dissenting opinion, Justices Kathryn Mickle Werdergar and Carlos Moreno disagreed with the majority decision that "one suffering a major depressive episode can remember if he or she simply tries harder to do so.

"People with a depressive illness cannot merely 'pull themselves together' and get better.' ... (Sorden) suffered from serious depression at the time he failed to register, and that sufferers of such depressive episodes often experience significant memory deficits."

Sorden's registration appeared to be current Thursday on California's Megan's Law database. No phone number for him was immediately available.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, email addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.