Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act (act), requires a person convicted of specified crimes to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. Existing law establishes 3 tiers of registration based on specified criteria, for periods of at least 10 years, at least 20 years, and life, respectively, for a conviction of specified sex offenses. Existing law exempts from mandatory registration under the act a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register. A willful failure to register, as required by the act, is a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the underlying offense.

This bill would require offenders convicted of engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than 3 years younger than the offender or, if the offender was 21 years of age or older, engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age, if the offense occurred on or after January 1, 2026, to register for 10 years as a tier one offender under the act, unless the offender was not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the offender to register. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act (act), requires a person convicted of specified crimes to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. Existing law establishes 3 tiers of registration based on specified criteria, for periods of at least 10 years, at least 20 years, and life, respectively, for a conviction of specified sex offenses. Existing law exempts from mandatory registration under the act a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register. A willful failure to register, as required by the act, is a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the underlying offense.

This bill would require offenders convicted of engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than 3 years younger than the offender or, if the offender was 21 years of age or older, engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age, if the offense occurred on or after January 1, 2026, to register for 10 years as a tier one offender under the act, unless the offender was not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the offender to register. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act (act), requires a person convicted of specified crimes to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. Existing law establishes 3 tiers of registration based on specified criteria, for periods of at least 10 years, at least 20 years, and life, respectively, for a conviction of specified sex offenses. Existing law exempts from mandatory registration under the act a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register. A willful failure to register, as required by the act, is a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the underlying offense.

This bill would require offenders guilty convicted of engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than 3 years younger than the offender or, if the offender was 21 years of age or older, engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age, if the offense occurred on or after January 1, 2026, to register for 10 years as a tier one offender under the act, unless the offender was not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the offender to register. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act (act), requires a person convicted of specified crimes to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. Existing law establishes 3 tiers of registration based on specified criteria, for periods of at least 10 years, at least 20 years, and life, respectively, for a conviction of specified sex offenses. Existing law exempts from mandatory registration under the act a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register. A willful failure to register, as required by the act, is a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the underlying offense.

This bill would require offenders guilty of engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than 3 years younger than the offender or, if the offender was 21 years of age or older, engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age, to register for 10 years as a tier one offender under the act, unless the offender was not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the offender to register. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 680

Author:(Rubio)

As Amended Ver:May 23, 2025

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Makes a defendant convicted of statutory rape subject to mandatory sex offender registration if there is more than a 10-year age gap with the minor, as specified.

Major Provisions

1. Applies to statutory rape offenses where the defendant is more than three years older than the minor or where the defendant is 21 years of age or older and the minor is under 16.
2. Applies the bill′s provisions prospectively to offenses that occurred on or after January 1, 2026.
3. Places the defendant on tier one of the sex offender registry which is subject to a minimum registration period of 10 years.

COMMENTS

According to the Author

″As an educator and a victim′s advocate, I know that more work needs to be done to protect vulnerable youth and reduce the demand for sex and the human trafficking of minors. It is inexplicable that some sex acts with a minor require sex offender registration but the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, irrespective of the age difference, does not. This is particularly troubling considering the increased risk for unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections that may result from sexual intercourse. SB 680 fixes this discrepancy. This bill will ensure those who engage in the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three (3) years younger than the offender, or if the offender is over 21 years of age and the minor is under 16 years of age, will be required to register as a Tier 1 sex offender, provided that the offender is more than 10 years older than the minor. This bill seeks to eliminate the current omission in the law that prevents offenders that engage in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor from mandated sex registration. In doing so, the sex offender registry will become a more robust investigative tool for law enforcement, the disparate protections afforded to victims that are currently based upon the specific type of sex act will be eliminated, and the demand for sex and human trafficking of minors will be reduced.″

Arguments in Support

According to California District Attorneys Association, ″Under existing law, certain offenders convicted of unlawful sexual activity with a minor more than 10 years younger are required to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290. However, offenders convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, even if the minor is more than 10 years younger, are not required to register. SB 680 appropriately refines this provision to ensure that individuals who engage in sexual intercourse with a minor more than 10 years younger are required to register as Tier One sex offenders (10 year registration requirement).

″The failure to adequately track and monitor offenders who exploit minors undermines public safety and sends the wrong message about the seriousness of these crimes. By closing the loophole based on type of sexual activity, SB 680 will ensure greater accountability and provide law enforcement with critical tools to monitor offenders who pose a risk to vulnerable youth.″

Arguments in Opposition

According to CASOMB, ″Current law requires mandatory lifetime registration for a violation of 288 (c)(1) which is unlawful intercourse with a 14 or 15-year-old with a 10-year age difference. The California Sex Offender Registration Act in PC 290.006 already grants the authority for the prosecutor and judge to order discretionary registration on a case-by-case basis for unlawful sex with a minor (PC 261.5) in appropriate cases.

″This bill would primarily affect cases where the victim was 16 or over. California is in a small minority of states that have an age of consent at 18, with no exceptions. California is already prosecuting individuals who have sexual relations with minors under the age of 18. Most of these offenders will receive supervision on probation.

″There is no scientific evidence that ordering sex offender registration for persons convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor would increase public safety. On the contrary, ordering a younger adult to register may increase their chances of re-offense due to housing, education, and familial instability. Many of those who will now be ordered to register would have committed their offenses in their 20′s. With the retroactive registry this would upend an individual′s life in many ways, even if they have been living crime free for the last 30 years.

″On January 21, 2021, SB 384 went into effect, which created a tiered system of registration. This bill signaled the first major reform of California′s antiquated Sex Offender Registration Act which was created in 1947. The bill sought to remove individuals from the registry who did not pose a risk of re-offense. Furthermore, the bill sought to lessen the burden on public safety and law enforcement resources. SB 680 would undermine the significant progress that California has made in catching up with the rest of the states and the Federal government in its approach to sex offender registration.

″In summary, CASOMB is in opposition to SB 680 because there is no evidence that this act will increase public safety. The court already possesses the authority to order registration on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, it will also divert costly resources that could be used to monitor higher risk offenders, thus making the community less safe.″

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. DOJ reports no significant fiscal impact to respond to additional requests from law enforcement agencies for sex offender information, process registration and termination documentation, and update criminal history information. DOJ notes there are numerous bills pending this session that add workload to the department and may result in a fiscal impact to the department in the aggregate if all, or several, are enacted. If, as some opponents argue is likely, the courts determine this bill requires retroactive registration (see below), costs to DOJ would likely be in the mid-hundreds of thousands of dollars annually ongoing, based on costs the department reported for a similar bill last session.
2. Likely non-reimbursable costs (local funds) of an unknown but potentially significant amount to local law enforcement agencies to fulfill sex offender registration requirements and provide supervision for people required to register under this bill. Although these duties are mandated by the state, the Commission on State Mandates has previously denied reimbursement for law enforcement duties relating to new sex offender registration requirements. The commission determined that, because the penalty for failure to register is a crime, a statute that adds a new registration requirement creates a new crime and therefore state reimbursement is not required.
3. Costs (General Fund, local funds) of an unknown but significant amount to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the counties to incarcerate people convicted of failure to register as required by this bill. Failure to register is charged as a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the underlying conviction, and is punishable by a term in county jail or in state prison. Actual incarceration costs will depend on the number of convictions, the length of each sentence, and whether each sentence must be served in county jail or state prison. The average annual cost to incarcerate one person in county jail is approximately $29,000, although costs are higher in larger counties. County incarceration costs are not subject to reimbursement by the state. However, overcrowding in county jails creates cost pressure on the General Fund because the state has historically granted new funding to counties to offset overcrowding resulting from public safety realignment.

According to CDCR data, 445 people were admitted to prison in 2024 with the primary offense of felony failure to register as a sex offender. The Legislative Analyst′s Office estimates the average annual cost to incarcerate one person in prison is $133,000. By way of illustration: if 20 people are convicted of failure to register following a statutory rape conviction and each must serve 16 months in prison, the resulting cost to CDCR would be over $3.5 million.

1. Possible cost pressures (General Fund) to the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) of an unknown but potentially significant amount due to this bill′s sex offender registration requirement. DSH reports ″significant, unknown cost pressures″ due to the potential for increased referrals to the DSH′s incompetent to stand trial caseload, delays in its conditional release program placements, and increased housing costs, as well as workload pressures for DSH′s sex offender risk assessment evaluators. If this bill passed, DSH plans to monitor its implementation and may request a budget augmentation at a later date.

VOTES

SENATE FLOOR: 37-1-2

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Becker, Blakespear, Cabaldon, Caballero, Cervantes, Choi, Cortese, Dahle, Durazo, Gonzalez, Grayson, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, McNerney, Menjivar, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Pérez, Richardson, Rubio, Seyarto, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Strickland, Umberg, Valladares, Wahab, Weber Pierson

NO: Wiener

ABS, ABST OR NV: Arreguín, Reyes

ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 9-0-0

YES: Schultz, Alanis, Mark González, Haney, Harabedian, Lackey, Nguyen, Ramos, Sharp-Collins

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Sanchez, Arambula, Calderon, Caloza, Dixon, Elhawary, Fong, Mark González, Ahrens, Pacheco, Pellerin, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

UPDATED

VERSION: May 23, 2025

CONSULTANT: Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0001325

Date of Hearing: August 20, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 680

Author:(Rubio) – As Amended Ver:May 23, 2025

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires a defendant convicted of statutory rape to register as a sex offender if the defendant is more than 10 years older than the victim.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. DOJ reports no significant fiscal impact to respond to additional requests from law enforcement agencies for sex offender information, process registration and termination documentation, and update criminal history information. DOJ notes there are numerous bills pending this session that add workload to the department and may result in a fiscal impact to the department in the aggregate if all, or several, are enacted. If, as some opponents argue is likely, the courts determine this bill requires retroactive registration (see below), costs to DOJ would likely be in the mid-hundreds of thousands of dollars annually ongoing, based on costs the department reported for a similar bill last session.
2. Likely non-reimbursable costs (local funds) of an unknown but potentially significant amount to local law enforcement agencies to fulfill sex offender registration requirements and provide supervision for people required to register under this bill. Although these duties are mandated by the state, the Commission on State Mandates has previously denied reimbursement for law enforcement duties relating to new sex offender registration requirements. The commission determined that, because the penalty for failure to register is a crime, a statute that adds a new registration requirement creates a new crime and therefore state reimbursement is not required.
3. Costs (General Fund, local funds) of an unknown but significant amount to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the counties to incarcerate people convicted of failure to register as required by this bill. Failure to register is charged as a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the underlying conviction, and is punishable by a term in county jail or in state prison. Actual incarceration costs will depend on the number of convictions, the length of each sentence, and whether each sentence must be served in county jail or state prison. The average annual cost to incarcerate one person in county jail is approximately $29,000, although costs are higher in larger counties. County incarceration costs are not subject to reimbursement by the state. However, overcrowding in county jails creates cost pressure on the General Fund because the state has historically granted new funding to counties to offset overcrowding resulting from public safety realignment.

According to CDCR data, 445 people were admitted to prison in 2024 with the primary offense of felony failure to register as a sex offender. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates the average annual cost to incarcerate one person in prison is $133,000. By way of illustration: if 20 people are convicted of failure to register following a statutory rape conviction and each must serve 16 months in prison, the resulting cost to CDCR would be over $3.5 million.

1. Possible cost pressures (General Fund) to the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) of an unknown but potentially significant amount due to this bill’s sex offender registration requirement. DSH reports “significant, unknown cost pressures” due to the potential for increased referrals to the DSH’s incompetent to stand trial caseload, delays in its conditional release program placements, and increased housing costs, as well as workload pressures for DSH’s sex offender risk assessment evaluators. If this bill passed, DSH plans to monitor its implementation and may request a budget augmentation at a later date.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. Statutory rape is the colloquial name for the offenses included in Penal Code section 261.5, which criminalizes sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 18. Under existing law, unlawful intercourse with a 14- or 15-year-old victim by a defendant who is ten years older requires mandatory, lifetime sex offender registration. Offenses involving sexual contact with a victim younger than 14 are separate crimes and are punished more harshly, including by mandatory sex offender registration.

In pertinent part for this bill, statutory rape is a wobbler if the defendant is 18 or older and the victim is more than three years younger than the defendant, or if the defendant is 21 or older and the victim is under 16. A wobbler is an offense that may be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony at a prosecutor’s discretion. In the circumstances covered by this bill, statutory rape is punishable as a misdemeanor by imprisonment in county jail for up to a year, a fine, or both. The offense is punishable as a felony by 16 months, two years, or three years in county jail, or, if the defendant has certain prior convictions, a state prison term.

California law requires a person convicted of certain sex offenses to register with state and local law enforcement agencies as a sex offender. The law also authorizes a court to order any defendant to register as a sex offender if the court finds at the time of conviction or sentencing that the defendant committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification. People required to register as sex offenders are monitored by law enforcement and are subject to many onerous registration requirements, including annual reviews and restrictions on where they may live and work.

1. Support and Opposition. This bill is sponsored by the Los Angeles city attorney. Writing in support of this bill, the city attorney cites the prevalence of human trafficking in California and writes:

These statistics highlight the need to do more to protect vulnerable youth and reduce the demand for sex trafficking of minors. SB 680 answers this call. By requiring sex offender registration for those who engage in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, when the offender is more than 10 years older than the minor victim, SB 680 will help deter the sexual exploitation of children and hold those who prey upon them accountable.

A number of other district attorneys and law enforcement agencies also support this bill.

The bill is opposed by criminal justice reform groups and the California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB), a state advisory board made up of corrections officials, law enforcement representatives, county administrators, psychologists, and victims services representatives. Based on research on sex offender recidivism and due to the significant cost of registrant management, over the years CASOMB has recommended changing the state’s sex offender registration system to focus more resources and attention on offenders with the highest risk of reoffending while reducing restrictions on lower-level offenders. In opposition to this bill, CASOMB writes:

This bill will not enhance public safety, and it will create a significant financial burden to the state and local law enforcement agencies…There is no scientific evidence that ordering sex offender registration for persons convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor would increase public safety. On the contrary, ordering a younger adult to register may increase their chances of re-offense due to housing, education, and familial instability.

CASOMB also argues that this bill will require retroactive sex offender registration for people convicted of the affected offense before this bill is enacted. Penal Code section 290.023 states that sex offender registration requirements apply to each person convicted of an offense named in the statute “without regard to when his or her crime or crimes were committed.” Although the text of this bill requires registration only for offenses that occur on or after January 1, 2026, the bill’s language arguably conflicts with the requirements in Penal Code section 290.023. If a court determines this bill requires retroactive registration, all of the costs described above will be significantly higher because the bill’s requirements will apply to a much larger population of people, resulting in a far greater number of registrations and violations for failure to register.

Analysis Prepared by: Annika Carlson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: July 15, 2025

Deputy Chief Counsel: Stella Choe

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Nick Schultz, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 680

Author:(Rubio) – As Amended Ver:May 23, 2025

SUMMARY: Makes a defendant convicted of statutory rape subject to mandatory sex offender registration if there is more than a 10-year age gap with the minor, as specified. Specifically, this bill:

1. Applies to statutory rape offenses where the defendant is more than 3 years older than the minor or where the defendant is 21 years of age or older and the minor is under 16.
2. Applies the bill’s provisions prospectively to offenses that occurred on or after January 1, 2026.
3. Places the defendant on tier one of the sex offender registry which is subject to a minimum registration period of 10 years.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires a sex offender to register for ten years, 20 years, or for a lifetime, depending on the offense. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(1-2), (d).)
   
2. Requires persons convicted of specified sex offenses to register a sex offender, or re-register if the person has been previously registered, upon release from incarceration, placement, commitment, or release on probation. States that the registration shall consist of all of the following:
   
   1. A statement signed in writing by the person, giving information as shall be required by DOJ and giving the name and address of the person's employer, and the address of the person's place of employment, if different from the employer's main address;
      
   2. Fingerprints and a current photograph taken by the registering official;
      
   3. The license plate number of any vehicle owned by, regularly driven by or registered in the name of the registrant; and,
      
   4. Notice to the person that he or she may have a duty to register in any other state where he or she may relocate; and, Copies of adequate proof of residence, such as a California driver's license or identification card, recent rent or utility receipt or any other information that the registering official believes is reliable. (Pen. Code, § 290.015, subd. (a).)
3. Exempts from the mandatory registration requirement a person convicted of participating in an act of oral copulation, sodomy, or sexual penetration with a minor if, at the time of the offense, the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor, as specified. This paragraph does not preclude the court from requiring the person to register under the discretionary sex offender registration statute. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(3).)
4. Provides that willful violation of any part of the registration requirements constitutes a misdemeanor if the offense requiring registration was a misdemeanor, and constitutes a felony of the offense requiring registration was a felony or if the person has a prior conviction of failing to register. (Pen. Code, § 290.018, subd. (a) & (b).)
   
5. Provides that within three days thereafter, the registering law enforcement agency or agencies shall forward the statement, fingerprints, photograph, and vehicle license plate number, if any, to the Department of Justice (DOJ). (Pen. Code, § 290.015, subd. (b).)
   
6. States that a misdemeanor failure to register shall be punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, and a felony failure to register shall be punishable in the state prison for 16 months, two or three years. (Pen. Code, § 290.018, subd. (a) & (b).)
   
7. Provides that a court can require a person not otherwise required to register if the court finds at the time of conviction or sentencing that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for the propose of sexual gratification. (Pen. Code, § 290.006)
   
8. States that the sex offender registration provisions are applicable to every person described in the Act without regard to when his or her crime or crimes were committed and to every offense described regardless of when it was committee. (Pen. Code, § 290.023.)
   
9. States that the DOJ is required to make information about registered sex offenders available to the public via an Internet Web site, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 290.46.)
   
10. Provides that DOJ is required to include on this web site a registrant's name and known aliases, a photograph, a physical description, including gender and race, date of birth, criminal history, any other information that the Department of Justice deems relevant unless expressly excluded under the statute. (Id.)
11. Requires DOJ to include on its Internet Web site either the home address or zip code of residence of persons who are required to register as sex offenders based upon their registration offense (Pen. Code, §§ 290.46, subd. (b)(2); 290.46, subd. (d)(2).)
    
12. Imposes specified restrictions on persons registered as sex offenders with respect to employment in certain areas, such as in education (Education Code §§ 35021, 44345), community care facilities (Health and Safety Code § 1522), residential care facilities (Health and Safety Code § 1568.09), residential care facilities for the elderly (Health and Safety Code § 1569.17), day care facilities (Health and Safety Code § 1596.871), engaging in the business of massage (Government Code § 51032), physicians and surgeons (Business and Professions Code § 2221 ), registered nurses (Business and Professions Code § 2760.1), among others.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

1. Author's Statement: According to the author, “As an educator and a victim’s advocate, I know that more work needs to be done to protect vulnerable youth and reduce the demand for sex and the human trafficking of minors. It is inexplicable that some sex acts with a minor require sex offender registration but the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, irrespective of the age difference, does not. This is particularly troubling considering the increased risk for unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections that may result from sexual intercourse. SB 680 fixes this discrepancy. This bill will ensure those who engage in the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three (3) years younger than the offender, or if the offender is over 21 years of age and the minor is under 16 years of age, will be required to register as a Tier 1 sex offender, provided that the offender is more than 10 years older than the minor. This bill seeks to eliminate the current omission in the law that prevents offenders that engage in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor from mandated sex registration. In doing so, the sex offender registry will become a more robust investigative tool for law enforcement, the disparate protections afforded to victims that are currently based upon the specific type of sex act will be eliminated, and the demand for sex and human trafficking of minors will be reduced.”
   
2. History of California’s Sex Offender Registration Act: California was the first state to require sex offender registration in 1947. The stated purpose for sex offender registration is to deter offenders from committing future crimes, provide law enforcement with an additional investigative tool, and increase public protection. (Wright v. Superior Court (1997) 15 Cal.4th 521, 526; Alissa Pleau (2007) Review of Selected 2007 California Legislation: Closing a Loophole in California's Sex Offender Registration Laws, 38 McGeorge L.Rev. 276, 277; Hatton v. Bonner (2004) 365 F.3d 955, 961.) California’s sex offender registration law historically required lifetime registration by persons convicted of specified sex crimes. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (a).)

In 1996, California enacted “Megan's Law” allowing the public to access an address list of registered sex offenders. Before 2003, members of the public could only obtain the information on the Megan's Law list by calling a “900” number or visiting certain designated law enforcement agencies and reviewing a CD-ROM. However, in 2003, California required the DOJ to put the Megan’s Law list of offenders on a public access website with the offender’s address, photo and list of offenses. (See Pen. Code, § 290.46, subd. (a).) For some offenders with less serious offenses, only their ZIP code is listed. Now, a citizen can enter their address and see if there are registered sex offenders living in the community or even next door.

In 2017, California modified its sex registry to a three-tiered registration system based on seriousness of the crime, risk of sexual reoffending, and criminal history. (SB 384 (Wiener), Ch. 541, Stats. 2017.) The recommendation to move to a tiered system came from the California Sex Offender Management Board’s (CASOMB) 2010 recommendations report.^[1]According to the committee’s analysis for the bill which started off as SB 421 (Wiener) of that same year:

Based on a survey of several municipal law enforcement agencies in California, it is estimated that local law enforcement agencies spend between 60-66% of their resources dedicated for sex offender supervision on monthly or annual registration paperwork because of the large numbers of registered sex offenders on our registry. If we can remove low risk offenders from the registry it will free up law enforcement officers to monitor the high risk offenders living in our communities. Law enforcement cannot protect the community effectively when they are in the office doing monthly or annual paperwork for low risk offenders, when they could be out in the community monitoring high risk offenders. Furthermore, the public is overwhelmed by the number of offenders displayed online in each neighborhood and do not know which offenders are considered low risk and which offenders are considered high risk and therefore truly dangerous.

(Sen. Com. on Public Safety, Analysis of Senate Bill No. 421 (2017-18 Reg. Sess.) as amended Apr. 17, 2017, p. 9.) A tier one offender is someone who is required to register for a misdemeanor sex offense or a felony conviction that is not a serious or violent felony. Tier one requires a person to register for a minimum of 10 years. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(1).) A tier two offender is a person who is required to register for a felony that is defined as a serious or violent felony or other specified sex offenses, unless the person is otherwise required to register under tier three. Tier two requires a person to register for a minimum of 20 years. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(2).) A tier three offender is a person who is convicted of a specified offense or under the One-Strike Sex Law, or is designated as a sexually violent predator or habitual sex offender, in addition to other qualifying offenses and circumstances. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(3).)

Sex offenders are required to register annually within five working days of their birthday. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (b).) If the offender has no fixed address, they are required to register every 30 days. (Pen. Code, § 290.011, subd. (a).) A person is also required to notify law enforcement of any change of address within five days of moving. (Pen. Code, § 290.013.) A person who fails to register as a sex offender within the period required by law is guilty of a felony punishable by 16 months, 2 or 3 years. (Pen. Code, § 290.018, subd. (b).) A person who changes their name is required to inform law enforcement within five working days. (Pen. Code, § 290.14, subd. (a).)

The minimum time for completion of the required registration period in tier one or tier two begins on the date of the person’s release from incarceration or other commitment on the registerable offense. The time period is tolled during any period of subsequent incarceration or commitment, except that arrests not resulting in conviction, adjudication or revocation of supervision shall not toll the registration period. The minimum time period shall be extended by one year for each misdemeanor conviction of failing to register, and by three years for each felony conviction of failing to register, without regard to the actual time served in custody for the conviction (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (e).)

Although most registerable offenses are felonies, there are some alternate felony/misdemeanor penalties and a few straight misdemeanors. (See Pen. Code, § 243.4 (sexual battery); Pen. Code, § 266c (obtaining sexual consent by fraud); Pen. Code, §§ 311.1, 311.2, subd. (c), 311.4, 311.11 (child pornography); Pen. Code § 647.6 (annoying or molesting a child); and, Pen. Code, § 314, subd. (1)(2) (indecent exposure).) Certain offenses where the act was engaged in voluntarily, albeit without consent because minors cannot legally consent, only require sex offender registration when there is more than a 10-year age gap between the defendant and the minor. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(2).)

Generally, a court may also order a person not otherwise required to register as a sex offender to register if they find that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for the purposes of sexual gratification. (Pen. Code, § 290.006.)

As discussed above, there is an exemption for mandatory registration in existing law for a person who is convicted of participating in non-forcible acts (i.e. voluntary) of oral copulation, sodomy, or sexual penetration with a minor (15 years or older) providing that registration is not required if the difference between their ages is 10 years or less. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(2).) The law clarifies that the court may still require the person to register as a sex offender under its discretionary powers. (Pen. Code, § 290.006.) This exemption was enacted in 2019 with the intent of addressing the disparate treatment of sex acts that originated from the criminalization of gay sex.

According to the Assembly Committee on Public Safety’s analysis of the tiered registration bill:

This bill specifies that the offenses of non-forcible sodomy, oral copulation, and sexual penetration with a minor would no longer require mandatory sex offender registration unless there is a ten year gap between the minor and the perpetrator. These offenses, when committed without force, where the minor was a willing participant and over the age of 14 are sometimes referred to colloquially as “Hofsheier offenses.” The reason for this is that a California Supreme Court decision in 2006, People v. Hofsheier, found that requiring mandatory sex offender registration for one such an offense – oral copulation – was unconstitutional if the state did not also require registration for a person convicted of the offense of non-forcible sexual intercourse with a minor. (37 Cal. 4th 1185.) Offenses in which the victim is under the age of 14 are not considered Hofsheier offenses and they are typically prosecuted as a “lewd and lascivious act with a minor” under a separate penal code section. Lewd and lascivious acts refer to any sort of touching of a person with the intent to sexually arouse the perpetrator or the minor. (Pen. Code § 288; CALCRIM No. 1060.) Sex offender registration is mandatory for lewd and lascivious acts with minors, even if the conduct was non-forcible and the minor was a willing participant.^[2]

This bill would add statutory rape to the list of crimes requiring mandatory sex offender registrations if the defendant was 21 years or older or was more than 3 years older than the minor at the time of the offense if there is more than a ten-year age gap. Similar to existing mandatory registration exceptions for persons not more than 10 years older than the minor, this bill would provide that the court may still order a person to register as a sex offender under the discretionary sex offender registration statute. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(3), referencing Pen. Code § 290.006.)

1. Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB): CASOMB was created in 2006 to examine the state of California’s sex offender laws, and particularly, sex offender registration.^[3] CASOMB’s mission is to decrease sexual victimization and increase community safety by addressing issues, concerns and problems related to community management of adult sex offenders by identifying and developing recommendations to improve policies and practices.^[4] As a general matter, the Legislature sought to defer research questions to CASOMB given its capacity for detailed analysis of available data and the highly politicized nature of sex offender registration.

As mentioned above, in response to the CASOMB recommendations, the Legislature established a three-tiered registration system based on seriousness of the crime, risk of sexual reoffending, and criminal history. Duration of registration would range from 10 years to lifetime registration. According to CASOMB, some recommendations were ignored and discrepancies resulted due to the highly political nature of sex offenders and last minute amendments:

Years were spent by the CASOMB (a multidisciplinary board that includes victim advocates, law enforcement, district attorney, defense attorney, judge, treatment providers, and other key stakeholders) and district attorneys to create a responsible and evidence informed bill. The bill was co-sponsored by Los Angeles District Attorneys, Equality California, and California Coalition against Sexual Assault (victim advocates) and received no formal opposition. Through the amendment process, several changes were made to the well thought out and written proposal that affected tier placement for certain types of offense behavior. In its original version, it passed through the assembly public safety and senate public safety committees. It was modified as a condition of being released from the Assembly Appropriations Committee. In this gut and amend process, many offense behaviors were moved from tiers 1 and 2 and placed into Tier 3.

In examining Tier 3, the CASOMB recognizes that it requires amending as some of the offenses that were placed in Tier 3 were not research informed decisions. Tier 3 was intended for individuals with lifetime prison sentences, individuals found to meet the criteria under the Sexually Violent Predator Act, Mentally Disordered Offenders with increased risk of re-offense, and individuals with more than one separately tried sexual offense conviction against a minor. The changes recommended by the CASOMB are the first steps in restoring the original intent of the bill.

Risk for recidivism for general criminal offending, as well as sexual offense reoffending, decreases over time for those who are in the community and remain offense free. In the literature, this is referred to as “time offense-free.” Desistance is an important concept to consider and is marked by the absence of offending. In research, this is usually defined as the absence of self-reported or officially recorded criminal behavior for a specific amount of time, such as 10 years. “For sexual offenders, a plausible threshold for desistance is when their risk for a new sexual offense is not different than the risk of a spontaneous sexual offense among individuals who have no prior sexual offense history but who have a history of nonsexual crime . . . A recent review of 11 studies from diverse jurisdictions (n = 543,024) found a rate of spontaneous sexual offenses among nonsexual offenders to be in the 1% to 2% range after 5 years.”2 Hanson, et al (2019) found that even the highest risk sexual offenders, who have not committed any new offenses (criminal or sexual) for 20 years while in the community, are no more likely to commit a new offense than the general criminal offender.

. . . .

Research has also been conducted on the impact of registration on community safety and recidivism. Research does not support a link between registration and preventing recidivism or improving community safety. The cost of implementing registration for jurisdictions like Los Angeles County, is staggering. The CASOMB’s “Tiering Background Paper” released in 2014 highlighted many of these problems.^[5]

In this 2023 report, the CASOMB made several recommended changes for placement of offenses in the tiered registry and points to the disparities between these crimes:

Placing individuals with a conviction of PC 288(c)(1) on Tier 3, is not consistent with the current legal continuum for sentencing. Individuals convicted under PC 261.5. subdivision (d) - unlawful sexual intercourse, sentencing includes a range of 1 year for misdemeanors, and 2, 3, or 4 years for felonies and does not require registration. Individuals convicted for PC 288(a) – Lewd and Lascivious acts with a minor under the age of 14 are placed in Tier 2. Individuals convicted for PC 288(a) have more severe sentences. The statute states, “they shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, by three, six, or eight years.” While those convicted for PC 288(c)(1) “shall be punished by one, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year.” PC 667.5 defines Section (a) as a serious offense, which allows for them to stay on probation for 5 years.^[6]

Notably in the 2023 report, CASOMB recognized that statutory rape did not have a mandatory registration requirement and did make a recommendation requiring registration for this offense, which is what this bill proposes if the defendant is more than 10 years older than the minor.

After the introduction of this bill, CASOMB has authored a position paper opposing the mandatory registration requirement that this bill would impose which is available on its website^[7] (see note 6 below.)

1. Effect of this Legislation: This bill would require mandatory sex offender registration for statutory rape offenses that occur on or after January 1, 2026 where the defendant is more than 10 years older than the minor. This is similar to existing provisions of law that require mandatory registration for a defendant who engages in non-forcible sexual acts with a minor; this bill would require a person to register as a sex offender based on a conviction of statutory rape if they are more than 10 years older than the minor. The person would be subject to registration for a minimum of 10 years under Tier One of the sex offender registry. Because of the mandatory sex offender registration requirement, the person if sentenced to a term of imprisonment would have to serve that time in state prison even though the underlying statute states it is a county-jail eligible crime. (Pen. Code, § 1170, subd. (h)(3).)

Existing law specifies that the sex offender registration requirements are to be applied retroactively. (Pen. Code, § 290.023.) However, this bill specifies that mandatory registration is to apply to persons who offenses occurred on or after January 1, 2026. This creates a conflict in the sex offender registration act that may lead to legal challenges on which provision controls. Additionally, while it may be clear in some cases that the sexual conduct occurred on or after January 1, 2026, in other cases it may not be so clear. For example, the sex offender registration act requires a person who was convicted of crimes in other states to register as a sex offender upon certain findings. (Pen. Code, § 290.005.) If the criminal summary information or court records do not contain specified information, it may be difficult to ascertain the dates the crime occurred or whether there is more than a 10 year age difference with the minor.

Existing law contains a similar sex offender registration requirement for persons who are convicted of the crime of soliciting a minor when they are more than 10 years older than the minor and the person has a prior conviction for the same offense. This registration requirement applies to convictions that occur on or after January 1, 2025. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(2)(A).) The date of a conviction, rather than when the crime occurred, may be easier to determine.

1. Argument in Support: According to California District Attorneys Association, “Under existing law, certain offenders convicted of unlawful sexual activity with a minor more than 10 years younger are required to register pursuant to Penal Code section 290. However, offenders convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, even if the minor is more than 10 years younger, are not required to register. SB 680 appropriately refines this provision to ensure that individuals who engage in sexual intercourse with a minor more than 10 years younger are required to register as Tier One sex offenders (10 year registration requirement).

“The failure to adequately track and monitor offenders who exploit minors undermines public safety and sends the wrong message about the seriousness of these crimes. By closing the loophole based on type of sexual activity, SB 680 will ensure greater accountability and provide law enforcement with critical tools to monitor offenders who pose a risk to vulnerable youth.”

1. Argument in Opposition: According to CASOMB, “Current law requires mandatory lifetime registration for a violation of 288 (c)(1) which is unlawful intercourse with a 14 or 15-year-old with a 10-year age difference. The California Sex Offender Registration Act in PC 290.006 already grants the authority for the prosecutor and judge to order discretionary registration on a case-by-case basis for unlawful sex with a minor (PC 261.5) in appropriate cases.

“This bill would primarily affect cases where the victim was 16 or over. California is in a small minority of states that have an age of consent at 18, with no exceptions. California is already prosecuting individuals who have sexual relations with minors under the age of 18. Most of these offenders will receive supervision on probation.

“There is no scientific evidence that ordering sex offender registration for persons convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor would increase public safety. On the contrary, ordering a younger adult to register may increase their chances of re-offense due to housing, education, and familial instability. Many of those who will now be ordered to register would have committed their offenses in their 20’s. With the retroactive registry this would upend an individual’s life in many ways, even if they have been living crime free for the last 30 years.

“On January 21, 2021, SB 384 went into effect, which created a tiered system of registration. This bill signaled the first major reform of California’s antiquated Sex Offender Registration Act which was created in 1947. The bill sought to remove individuals from the registry who did not pose a risk of re-offense. Furthermore, the bill sought to lessen the burden on public safety and law enforcement resources. SB 680 would undermine the significant progress that California has made in catching up with the rest of the states and the Federal government in its approach to sex offender registration.

“In summary, CASOMB is in opposition to SB 680 because there is no evidence that this act will increase public safety. The court already possesses the authority to order registration on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, it will also divert costly resources that could be used to monitor higher risk offenders, thus making the community less safe.”

1. Related Legislation: AB 1437 (Macedo) would impose mandatory sex offender registration requirements on a person who is discharged from a secure youth treatment facility for specified sex offenses committed while the person was a minor. AB 1437 was made a two-year bill.
   
2. Prior Legislation:
   1. SB 1128 (Portantino), of the 2023-24 Legislative Session, was substantially similar to this bill. SB 1128 was held in suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
   2. SB 384 (Weiner), Chapter 541, Statutes of 2017, created a tiered registry for sex offenses so that people will be required to register for 10 years, 20 years, or lifetime depending on the conviction offense.
   3. SB 421 (Weiner), of the 2017-18 Legislative Session, would have recast the California sex offender registry scheme into a three-tiered registration system for periods of 10 years, 20 years or life, for a conviction in adult court of specified sex offenses, and five years, 10 years, and possibly life, for an adjudication as a ward of the juvenile court for specified sex offenses. SB 421 was held in suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
      

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Arcadia Police Officers' Association
Brea Police Association
Burbank Police Officers' Association
California Association of School Police Chiefs
California Coalition of School Safety Professionals
California District Attorneys Association
California Narcotic Officers' Association
California Reserve Peace Officers Association
City of Los Angeles
Claremont Police Officers Association
Corona Police Officers Association
Culver City Police Officers' Association
Expediente Rojo Project
Forgotten Children INC.
Fullerton Police Officers' Association
Los Angeles City Attorney's Office
Los Angeles School Police Management Association
Los Angeles School Police Officers Association
Murrieta Police Officers' Association
Newport Beach Police Association
Palos Verdes Police Officers Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC)
Placer County Deputy Sheriffs' Association
Pomona Police Officers' Association
Riverside County District Attorney
Riverside Police Officers Association
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
Santa Ana Police Officers Association
Sistahfriends
Zoe International

Oppose

ACLU California Action
Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws
CA Sex Offender Management Board
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Initiate Justice
Justice2jobs Coalition
LA Defensa
Local 148 LA County Public Defenders Union
San Francisco Public Defender
Sex Offenders for Accountability and Recovery
Smart Justice California, a Project of Tides Advocacy

Analysis Prepared by: Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744

1. See https://casomb.org/docs/CASOMB%20Report%20Jan%202010_Final%20Report.pdf (Jan. 2010), p. 50 (accessed Jun. 19, 2025). ↑

2. Assem. Comm. on Public Safety, Analysis of Senate Bill No. 145 (2019-20 Reg. Sess.) as amended May 21, 2019, pp. 4-5. ↑

3. See https://casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=1211 [accessed July 2, 2025]. ↑

4. CASOMB - CA Sex Offender Management Board [accessed July 8, 2025].) ↑

5. See CASOMB December 2023 Report, p. 5 https://casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=1211, pp. 6-7. ↑

6. Id. at pp. 5-9. ↑

7. See CASOMB SB 680 Position Paper [accessed July 8, 2025]. ↑

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 680

Author: Rubio (D)

Amended: 5/23/25

Vote: 21

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 4-1, 4/8/25

AYES: Seyarto, Caballero, Gonzalez, Pérez

NOES: Wiener

NO VOTE RECORDED: Arreguín

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-0, 5/23/25

AYES: Caballero, Seyarto, Cabaldon, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab

NO VOTE RECORDED: Dahle

SUBJECT: Sex offender registration: unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor

SOURCE: Los Angeles City Attorney

DIGEST:

This bill requires sex offender registration for a period of 10 years when the person is convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (statutory rape) and the age difference is more than 10 years between the adult and the minor if the offense occurs on or after January 1, 2026.

ANALYSIS:

Existing Law:

1. Requires persons convicted of specified sex offenses to register a sex offender, or re-register if the person has been previously registered, upon release from incarceration, placement, commitment, or release on probation. Registration shall consist of all of the following:
   1. A statement signed in writing by the person, giving information as shall be required by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and giving the name and address of the person's employer, and the address of the person's place of employment, if different from the employer's main address;
   2. Fingerprints and a current photograph taken by the registering official;
   3. The license plate number of any vehicle owned by, regularly driven by or registered in the name of the registrant;
   4. Notice to the person that he or she may have a duty to register in any other state where he or she may relocate; and, Copies of adequate proof of residence, such as a California driver's license or identification card, recent rent or utility receipt or any other information that the registering official believes is reliable. (Penal (Pen.) Code, § 290.015, subd. (a).)
2. Implements, as of January 1, 2021, a registry comprised of three tiers for persons convicted of various offenses for a period of 10 years, 20 years, or life, depending on the nature of the conviction. (Pen. Code, § 290, subds. (d).)
3. Provides that a person required to register for conviction in adult criminal court is subject to lifetime registration (tier three), if any of the following apply:
   1. Following conviction of a registerable offense, the person was subsequently convicted of a violent registerable felony sex offense in a separate proceeding;
   2. Following conviction of a registerable offense, the person was convicted of a violent felony, committed as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification, for which he or she was ordered to register;
   3. The person was committed as a sexually violent predator;
   4. The person was convicted one of 17 specified offenses:
   5. The person's risk level on the static risk assessment instrument for sex offenders is well above average risk at the time of release;
   6. The person is a habitual sex offender;
   7. The person was convicted of lewd or lascivious acts on a child under age 14 in two separate proceedings brought and tried separately;
   8. The person was sentenced to 15 to 25 years to life for an offense under the habitual sex offender law;
   9. The person is required to register as a mentally disordered sex offender;
   10. The person was convicted of specified felony human trafficking offenses;
   11. The person was convicted of felony sexual battery by restraint or while the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act;
   12. The person was convicted of rape of a child, or by force or violence, or where the victim was prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance, or where the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act;
   13. The person was convicted of spousal rape by force or violence;
   14. The person was convicted of rape in concert;
   15. The person was convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor involving lewd or lascivious conduct;
   16. The person was convicted of sodomy by force or violence, or in concert, or where the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act, or where the victim was prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance;
   17. The person was convicted of oral copulation upon by force or violence, or in concert, or where the victim is unconscious of the nature of the act, or where the victim was prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance;
   18. The person was convicted of an act of sexual penetration by force or violence, or where the victim is unconscious of the nature of the act, or where the victim is prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance, or where with a child under age 14 and who was more than 10 years younger than the person;
   19. The person was convicted of child pornography, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(3).)
4. Provides that unless a person is subject to registration under tier three as specified above, a person required to register for an adult court conviction of a serious, or violent, or other specified felony sex offenses must register for a minimum of 20 years (tier two). (Pen. Code, § 290, sub. (d)(2).)
5. Provides that unless a person is subject to registration under tier two or tier three as specified above, a person required to register for an adult court conviction of a misdemeanor or non-violent, non-serious sex offense must register for a minimum of 10 years (tier one). (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(1).)
6. Requires a person who is 18 years of age or older, who is convicted on or after January 1, 2025, of solicitation of a minor who was under 16 years of age at the time of the offense, and who has a prior conviction for the same offense, to register as sex offender if the person was more than 10 years older than the solicited minor, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(2)(A).)
7. Gives a judge discretion to order sex offender registration for any offense if it finds that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification. (Pen. Code, § 290.006, subd. (a).)
8. States that unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the perpetrator if the person is a minor under 18 years of age. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (a).) It is punishable as follows:
   1. A person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (b).)
   2. A person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of a wobbler. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (c).)
   3. A person 21years of age or older who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who under 16 years of age is guilty of a wobbler. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (d).)

This Bill:

1. Requires sex offender registration if the defendant is 18 or older, engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, and the minor is more than three years younger than the defendant.
2. Requires registration if the defendant is 21 or older, engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, and the minor is under 16.
3. Provides that, notwithstanding the above registration requirements, a person is not required to register if, at the time of the offense, they are not more than 10 years older than the minor.
4. Provides that the registration requirement applies only to offenses occurring on or after January 1, 2026.

Background

California was the first state to require sex offender registration in 1947. The stated purpose for sex offender registration is to deter offenders from committing future crimes, provide law enforcement with an additional investigative tool, and increase public protection. Until recently, California was one of the few states that required lifetime registration for all registerable offenses with no discernment. California had thousands of people on the registry that posed no threat to public safety, were deceased, or who had otherwise left the state. The registry was so bloated as to be meaningless in tracking who could be, dangerous people.

In 2006 the Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB) was created to examine the state of California’s sex offender laws and to provide the Governor, Legislature, as well as relevant state and local agencies with an assessment of current sex offender management practices and recommended areas of improvement. The SOMB’s highest priority became advocating for a system of tiered registry. In response to the SOMB recommendations, the Legislature passed SB 384 (Wiener, Chapter 541, Statutes of 2017), which established a three-tiered registration system based on seriousness of the crime, risk of sexual reoffending, and criminal history. Duration of registration ranges from 10 years to lifetime registration.

In its 2023 report, the SOMB makes several recommended changes for offenses in the tiered registry and points to the disparities between these crimes that resulted from last minute amendments to the tiered registry legislation. (Id. at pp. 5-9.) Notably, the SOMB did not mention requiring registration for the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, which is what this bill proposes. In fact, even before tiered registration, the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor did not require sex offender registration. It should also be noted that a court may already order a person not otherwise required to register as a sex offender if they find that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for the purposes of sexual gratification. (Pen. Code, § 290.006.)

Given that a court may already issue registration requirements where appropriate for the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, does it make sense to mandate registration for this offense as proposed by this bill? Arguably, doing so will only further exacerbate the discrepancies and unintended consequences that resulted in the tiered registry system when the recommendations of the SOMB were ignored.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriation Committee:

• Department of Justice (DOJ): Unknown, potentially significant costs (General Fund) to the DOJ to handle increased workload resulting from additional sex offender registrations in its Division of California Justice Information Services and Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis. DOJ would be responsible for, among other duties, processing requests for offender information from law enforcement agencies, processing registration documents and termination requests, updating offenders’ criminal history records, and handling related record management and programming. This includes processing requests for offender information received from law enforcement and other criminal justice agencies to aid in the prosecution of offenders who have failed to register as required by law.
• Supervision: Likely non-reimbursable costs (local funds) of an unknown but potentially significant amount to local law enforcement agencies to fulfill sex offender registration requirements and provide supervision for people required to register under this bill. According to the DOJ, there are over 120,000 individuals currently on the sex offender registry monitored by local law enforcement. Although these duties are mandated by the state, the Commission on State Mandates has previously denied reimbursement for law enforcement duties relating to new sex offender registration requirements. The Commission determined that since the penalty for failure to register is a crime, a statute that adds a new registration requirement creates a new crime and therefore state reimbursement is not required. (See Staff Comments)
  
• Incarceration: Costs (General Fund, local funds) of an unknown but significant amount to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the counties to incarcerate people convicted of failure to register as required by this bill. Failure to register is charged as a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the underlying conviction, and is punishable by a term in county jail or in state prison. Actual incarceration costs will depend on the number of convictions, the length of each sentence, and whether each sentence must be served in county jail or state prison.

The average annual cost to incarcerate one person in county jail is approximately $77,252 per year. Actual incarceration costs to counties will depend on the number of convictions and the length of each sentence. Although county incarceration costs are generally not considered reimbursable state mandates pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012), overcrowding in county jails creates cost pressure on the General Fund because the state has historically granted new funding to counties to offset overcrowding resulting from 2011 public safety realignment.

According to CDCR data, 469 people were admitted to prison in 2023 with the primary offense of felony failure to register as a sex offender. The Governor’s budget estimates that Proposition 36 (2024), which increased punishment for various theft and drug crimes, will cause the average daily prison population to be about 1% higher in 2024‑25 and 4% higher in 2025‑26. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates the average annual cost to incarcerate one person in state prison is $133,000. By way of illustration: if 20 people are convicted of failure to register following a statutory rape conviction and each must serve 16 months in prison, the resulting cost from this bill to CDCR would be over $3.5 million. Given the prevalence of mental illness among incarcerated people, legislation that sends more people to state prison adds significant costs to CDCR for the delivery of mental health care. About one‑third of the prison population has a diagnosed mental health need. The annual cost of operating a mental health crisis bed at CDCR is around $400,000. As part of the ongoing Coleman court case, CDCR has been incurring fines monthly since April 2023 for failing to reduce vacancy rates for five mental health classifications. The state has paid over $200 million in fines to date, and is still accruing fines.

• Department of State Hospitals: Unknown, significant costs (General Fund) to the DSH, in order to adequately house, treat, and care for an expanded population of persons that could committed to DSH that otherwise would not. Cost pressures to DSH are connected with an increase in state prison sentences. Expanding the crimes that require sex offender registration will increase the number of defendants committed to DSH. DSH, in conjunction with CDCR, developed new methodologies to increase Coleman referrals from CDCR to DSH. In recent years, California has invested significantly in attempting to decrease its population. DSH’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2025-26 totals $3.4 billion – an increase of $3.4 million from the 2024 Budget Act. This bill could increase both the Incompetent to Stand Trial (IST) population and Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) population, resulting in the need for additional funding.
  

According to data from CDCR 3,443 individuals were released from prison in 2024 who are required to register as a sex offender. Increasing the number of individuals who have to register as a sex offender is a cost pressure for both the state and counties for the administrative maintenance of registry and notification. Local police departments and sheriff’s offices are charged with managing the registration process. Registered sex offenders must re-register annually on their birthdays as well as every time they have a change of address. Transient sex offenders re-register every 30 days. Registration information collected by law enforcement is sent to the DOJ and stored in the statewide registry.

Based on a survey of several municipal law enforcement agencies in California, it is estimated that local law enforcement agencies spend between 60-66% of their resources dedicated for sex offender supervision on monthly or annual registration paperwork because of the large numbers of registered sex offenders on our registry.^[1] Law enforcement cannot protect the community effectively when they are in the office doing monthly or annual paperwork for low risk offenders, when they could be out in the community monitoring high-risk offenders. The public is overwhelmed by the number of offenders displayed online in each neighborhood and do not know which offenders are considered low risk and which offenders are considered high risk and therefore truly dangerous. The California Sex Offender Management Board recommends removing low risk offenders from the registry in order to free up law enforcement officers to monitor the high-risk offenders living in our communities. Considering that courts already have discretion to order a person to register for this offense under existing law, if it is so warranted, this bill would increase cost pressures without the attendant benefit to public safety.

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/23/2025)

Los Angeles City Attorney (Source)

Arcadia Police Officers' Association
Brea Police Association
Burbank Police Officers' Association
California Association of School Police Chiefs
California Coalition of School Safety Professionals
California District Attorneys Association
California Narcotic Officers' Association
California Reserve Peace Officers Association
City of Los Angeles
Claremont Police Officers Association
Corona Police Officers Association
Culver City Police Officers' Association
Expediente Rojo Project
Forgotten Children INC.
Fullerton Police Officers' Association
Los Angeles School Police Management Association
Los Angeles School Police Officers Association
Murrieta Police Officers' Association
Newport Beach Police Association
Palos Verdes Police Officers Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Placer County Deputy Sheriffs' Association
Pomona Police Officers' Association
Riverside County District Attorney
Riverside Police Officers Association
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
Santa Ana Police Officers Association
Sistahfriends
Zoe International

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/23/2025)

ACLU California Action
Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Public Defenders Association
Initiate Justice
Justice2jobs Coalition
LA Defensa
Local 148 LA County Public Defenders Union
San Francisco Public Defender
Smart Justice California, a Project of Tides Advocacy

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to the Los Angeles City Attorney, the sponsor of this bill:

According to the California Attorney General, “human trafficking is among the world’s fastest growing criminal enterprises and is estimated to be a $150 billion-a-year global industry,” which according to the California Child Welfare Council, involves over 100,000 children in the United States. Within the United States, California consistently ranks number one in the nation in the number of human trafficking cases reported to the National Human Trafficking Hotline and, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Los Angeles ranks near the top of the nation’s high intensity child prostitution areas. In acknowledging the prevalence and serious nature of this crime, the California Attorney General notes that young girls and women account for 99.4% of sex trafficking victims.

These statistics highlight the need to do more to protect vulnerable youth and reduce the demand for the sex trafficking of minors. SB 680 answers this call. By requiring sex offender registration for those who engage in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, when the offender is more than 10 years older than the minor victim, SB 680 will help deter the sexual exploitation of children and hold those who prey upon them accountable.

Moreover SB 680 fixes the current disparity that treats sex acts differently. It is inexplicable that some sex acts with a minor currently require sex offender registration but unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, irrespective of the age difference, does not. This disparity in the law in nonsensical considering the increased risks of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infection that may result from sexual intercourse. According to the California Department of Public Health, unintended adolescent pregnancies often lead to socioeconomic and health related challenges for the adolescent and their children. SB 680 recognizes this aggravated harm and, similar to how the law treats other sex acts with a minor, appropriately requires an offender who engaged in sexual intercourse with a minor to register in the sex offender registry.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:

According to the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws:

If enacted into law, SB 680 could dramatically increase the number of Californians required to register as a sex offender. In fact, the California Department of Justice has estimated that SB 680 could add up to 30,000 individuals to the state’s sex offender registry which is already the largest registry in the nation.

Specifically, SB 680 targets more than 30,000 individuals previously convicted of Penal Code 261.5, which was formerly known as statutory rape. These individuals have never been required to register as a sex offender and because SB 680 would be applied retroactively, they would be required to register for the first time even if they were convicted decades ago.

Also, if enacted into law, SB 680 would defeat the purpose of the Tiered Registry Law (SB 384) which was approved by the legislature and enacted into law in 2017. The purpose of that law was to reduce a bloated and ineffective registry that was both costly and failed to increase public safety.

Further, SB 680 would require extensive research by the California Department of Justice to identify and locate individuals convicted of PC 261.5 decades ago. This research would include the ages of both the perpetrator and the victim because SB 680 would apply only to cases in which there was an age difference of four years or more.

Finally, the registration requirements of SB 680 would adversely affect up to 30,000 individuals and their families due to challenges faced by every person required to register. Those challenges include, but are not limited to, unemployment or underemployment as well as reduced housing options that could lead to homelessness.

Prepared by: Sandy Uribe / PUB. S. /

5/27/25 13:24:02

**** END ****

1. See, California Sex Offender Management Board’s 2010 Recommendations Report. https://casomb.org/docs/CASOMB%20Report%20Jan%202010_Final%20Report.pdf (Jan. 2010), p. 50; Sen. Com. on Public Safety, Analysis of Senate Bill No. 421 (2017-18 Reg. Sess.) as amended Apr. 17, 2017, p. 9.; and Justice Policy Institute, [Registries and notification have not been proven to protect communities from sexual offenses, and may even distract from more effective approaches. https://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/resource_840.pdf.) ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 680 (Rubio) - Sex offender registration: unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor

Bill Summary:

SB 680 requires sex offender registration for engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, as specified

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on May 23, 2025

Fiscal Impact:

• Department of Justice (DOJ): Unknown, potentially significant costs (General Fund) to the DOJ to handle increased workload resulting from additional sex offender registrations in its Division of California Justice Information Services and Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis. DOJ would be responsible for, among other duties, processing requests for offender information from law enforcement agencies, processing registration documents and termination requests, updating offenders’ criminal history records, and handling related record management and programming. This includes processing requests for offender information received from law enforcement and other criminal justice agencies to aid in the prosecution of offenders who have failed to register as required by law.
• Supervision: Likely non-reimbursable costs (local funds) of an unknown but potentially significant amount to local law enforcement agencies to fulfill sex offender registration requirements and provide supervision for people required to register under this bill. According to the DOJ, there are over 120,000 individuals currently on the sex offender registry monitored by local law enforcement. Although these duties are mandated by the state, the Commission on State Mandates has previously denied reimbursement for law enforcement duties relating to new sex offender registration requirements. The Commission determined that since the penalty for failure to register is a crime, a statute that adds a new registration requirement creates a new crime and therefore state reimbursement is not required. (See Staff Comments)
  
• Incarceration: Costs (General Fund, local funds) of an unknown but significant amount to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the counties to incarcerate people convicted of failure to register as required by this bill. Failure to register is charged as a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the underlying conviction, and is punishable by a term in county jail or in state prison. Actual incarceration costs will depend on the number of convictions, the length of each sentence, and whether each sentence must be served in county jail or state prison.

The average annual cost to incarcerate one person in county jail is approximately $77,252 per year. Actual incarceration costs to counties will depend on the number of convictions and the length of each sentence. Although county incarceration costs are generally not considered reimbursable state mandates pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012), overcrowding in county jails creates cost pressure on the General Fund because the state has historically granted new funding to counties to offset overcrowding resulting from 2011 public safety realignment.

According to CDCR data, 469 people were admitted to prison in 2023 with the primary offense of felony failure to register as a sex offender. The Governor’s budget estimates that Proposition 36 (2024), which increased punishment for various theft and drug crimes, will cause the average daily prison population to be about 1% higher in 2024‑25 and 4% higher in 2025‑26. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates the average annual cost to incarcerate one person in state prison is $133,000. By way of illustration: if 20 people are convicted of failure to register following a statutory rape conviction and each must serve 16 months in prison, the resulting cost from this bill to CDCR would be over $3.5 million. Given the prevalence of mental illness among incarcerated people, legislation that sends more people to state prison adds significant costs to CDCR for the delivery of mental health care. About one‑third of the prison population has a diagnosed mental health need. The annual cost of operating a mental health crisis bed at CDCR is around $400,000. As part of the ongoing Coleman court case, CDCR has been incurring fines monthly since April 2023 for failing to reduce vacancy rates for five mental health classifications. The state has paid over $200 million in fines to date, and is still accruing fines.

• Department of State Hospitals: Unknown, significant costs (General Fund) to the DSH, in order to adequately house, treat, and care for an expanded population of persons that could committed to DSH that otherwise would not. Cost pressures to DSH are connected with an increase in state prison sentences. Expanding the crimes that require sex offender registration will increase the number of defendants committed to DSH. DSH, in conjunction with CDCR, developed new methodologies to increase Coleman referrals from CDCR to DSH. In recent years, California has invested significantly in attempting to decrease its population. DSH’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2025-26 totals $3.4 billion – an increase of $3.4 million from the 2024 Budget Act. This bill could increase both the Incompetent to Stand Trial (IST) population and Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) population, resulting in the need for additional funding.
  

According to data from CDCR 3,443 individuals were released from prison in 2024 who are required to register as a sex offender. Increasing the number of individuals who have to register as a sex offender is a cost pressure for both the state and counties for the administrative maintenance of registry and notification. Local police departments and sheriff’s offices are charged with managing the registration process. Registered sex offenders must re-register annually on their birthdays as well as every time they have a change of address. Transient sex offenders re-register every 30 days. Registration information collected by law enforcement is sent to the DOJ and stored in the statewide registry.

Based on a survey of several municipal law enforcement agencies in California, it is estimated that local law enforcement agencies spend between 60-66% of their resources dedicated for sex offender supervision on monthly or annual registration paperwork because of the large numbers of registered sex offenders on our registry.^[1] Law enforcement cannot protect the community effectively when they are in the office doing monthly or annual paperwork for low risk offenders, when they could be out in the community monitoring high-risk offenders. The public is overwhelmed by the number of offenders displayed online in each neighborhood and do not know which offenders are considered low risk and which offenders are considered high risk and therefore truly dangerous. The California Sex Offender Management Board recommends removing low risk offenders from the registry in order to free up law enforcement officers to monitor the high-risk offenders living in our communities. Considering that courts already have discretion to order a person to register for this offense under existing law, if it is so warranted, this bill would increase cost pressures without the attendant benefit to public safety.

Author Amendments:

Clarify that the bill is not retroactive.

-- END --

1. See, California Sex Offender Management Board’s 2010 Recommendations Report. https://casomb.org/docs/CASOMB%20Report%20Jan%202010_Final%20Report.pdf (Jan. 2010), p. 50; Sen. Com. on Public Safety, Analysis of Senate Bill No. 421 (2017-18 Reg. Sess.) as amended Apr. 17, 2017, p. 9.; and Justice Policy Institute, [Registries and notification have not been proven to protect communities from sexual offenses, and may even distract from more effective approaches. https://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/resource_840.pdf.) ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

SB 680 (Rubio) - Sex offender registration: unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor

Bill Summary:

SB 680 requires sex offender registration for engaging in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, as specified.

Fiscal Impact:

• Department of Justice (DOJ): Unknown, potentially significant costs (General Fund) to the DOJ to handle increased workload resulting from additional sex offender registrations in its Division of California Justice Information Services and Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis. DOJ would be responsible for, among other duties, processing requests for offender information from law enforcement agencies, processing registration documents and termination requests, updating offenders’ criminal history records, and handling related record management and programming. This includes processing requests for offender information received from law enforcement and other criminal justice agencies to aid in the prosecution of offenders who have failed to register as required by law.
• Supervision: Likely non-reimbursable costs (local funds) of an unknown but potentially significant amount to local law enforcement agencies to fulfill sex offender registration requirements and provide supervision for people required to register under this bill. According to the DOJ, there are over 120,000 individuals currently on the sex offender registry monitored by local law enforcement. Although these duties are mandated by the state, the Commission on State Mandates has previously denied reimbursement for law enforcement duties relating to new sex offender registration requirements. The Commission determined that since the penalty for failure to register is a crime, a statute that adds a new registration requirement creates a new crime and therefore state reimbursement is not required. (See Staff Comments)
  
• Incarceration: Costs (General Fund, local funds) of an unknown but significant amount to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the counties to incarcerate people convicted of failure to register as required by this bill. Failure to register is charged as a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the underlying conviction, and is punishable by a term in county jail or in state prison. Actual incarceration costs will depend on the number of convictions, the length of each sentence, and whether each sentence must be served in county jail or state prison.

The average annual cost to incarcerate one person in county jail is approximately $77,252 per year. Actual incarceration costs to counties will depend on the number of convictions and the length of each sentence. Although county incarceration costs are generally not considered reimbursable state mandates pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012), overcrowding in county jails creates cost pressure on the General Fund because the state has historically granted new funding to counties to offset overcrowding resulting from 2011 public safety realignment.

According to CDCR data, 469 people were admitted to prison in 2023 with the primary offense of felony failure to register as a sex offender. The Governor’s budget estimates that Proposition 36 (2024), which increased punishment for various theft and drug crimes, will cause the average daily prison population to be about 1% higher in 2024‑25 and 4% higher in 2025‑26. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates the average annual cost to incarcerate one person in state prison is $133,000. By way of illustration: if 20 people are convicted of failure to register following a statutory rape conviction and each must serve 16 months in prison, the resulting cost from this bill to CDCR would be over $3.5 million. Given the prevalence of mental illness among incarcerated people, legislation that sends more people to state prison adds significant costs to CDCR for the delivery of mental health care. About one‑third of the prison population has a diagnosed mental health need. The annual cost of operating a mental health crisis bed at CDCR is around $400,000. As part of the ongoing Coleman court case, CDCR has been incurring fines monthly since April 2023 for failing to reduce vacancy rates for five mental health classifications. The state has paid over $200 million in fines to date, and is still accruing fines.

• Department of State Hospitals: Unknown, significant costs (General Fund) to the DSH, in order to adequately house, treat, and care for an expanded population of persons that could committed to DSH that otherwise would not. Cost pressures to DSH are connected with an increase in state prison sentences. Expanding the crimes that require sex offender registration will increase the number of defendants committed to DSH. DSH, in conjunction with CDCR, developed new methodologies to increase Coleman referrals from CDCR to DSH. In recent years, California has invested significantly in attempting to decrease its population. DSH’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2025-26 totals $3.4 billion – an increase of $3.4 million from the 2024 Budget Act. This bill could increase both the Incompetent to Stand Trial (IST) population and Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) population, resulting in the need for additional funding.

Background:

Under Penal Code 290, people convicted of certain sex offenses are required to register as sex offenders. Some of these offenses include sodomy and oral copulation with a minor, enticing a child into a house of prostitution, solicitation of a minor for lewd purposes, annoying a child, child pornography, indecent exposure, rape, lewd acts with a minor under 14, contacting a minor with intent to commit a specified felony, sex trafficking a minor, pimping and pandering a minor, transporting a child under 16 for lewd purposes, aggravated sexual assault of a child, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, lewd acts with a minor under 14, sending harmful material to seduce a minor, continuous sexual assault of a minor, sex acts against a child 10 or younger, an solicitation of forcible sex crimes. An adult defendant who is convicted on or after January 1, 2025, of soliciting a minor when the defendant knew or should have known the person solicited was a minor, and who has a prior conviction for solicitation of a minor, shall be required to register as a sex offender if the adult defendant was more than 10 years older than the solicited minor.

Penal Code section 290.006 additionally authorizes the court to order any person to register as a sex offender, if the court finds at the time of conviction or sentencing that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification.

Individuals required to register as a sex offender are subject to stringent rules. For example, they can be prohibited from working or volunteering for certain positions are subject to residency restrictions, and can be prohibited from owning firearms.

Proposed Law:

This bill would require sex offender registration for 10 years when an adult is convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor and the age difference is more than 10 years between the adult and the minor.

Related Legislation:

SB 1128 (Portantino), held in Assembly Appropriations, 2024, was substantially similar to this bill.

Staff Comments:

Because it is uncertain whether this bill would apply retroactively, this bill could dramatically increase the number of Californians required to register as a sex offender. As a result, this bill could defeat the purpose of the Tiered Registry Law (SB 384) of 2017, which was enacted to reduce the oversaturated, ineffective registry that was costly and did not increase public safety.

According to data from CDCR 3,443 individuals were released from prison in 2024 who are required to register as a sex offender. Increasing the number of individuals who have to register as a sex offender is a cost pressure for both the state and counties for the administrative maintenance of registry and notification. Local police departments and sheriff’s offices are charged with managing the registration process. Registered sex offenders must re-register annually on their birthdays as well as every time they have a change of address. Transient sex offenders re-register every 30 days. Registration information collected by law enforcement is sent to the DOJ and stored in the statewide registry.

Based on a survey of several municipal law enforcement agencies in California, it is estimated that local law enforcement agencies spend between 60-66% of their resources dedicated for sex offender supervision on monthly or annual registration paperwork because of the large numbers of registered sex offenders on our registry.^[1] Law enforcement cannot protect the community effectively when they are in the office doing monthly or annual paperwork for low risk offenders, when they could be out in the community monitoring high-risk offenders. The public is overwhelmed by the number of offenders displayed online in each neighborhood and do not know which offenders are considered low risk and which offenders are considered high risk and therefore truly dangerous. The California Sex Offender Management Board recommends removing low risk offenders from the registry in order to free up law enforcement officers to monitor the high-risk offenders living in our communities.

Considering that courts already have discretion to order a person to register for this offense under existing law, if it is so warranted, this bill would increase cost pressures without the attendant benefit to public safety.

-- END --

1. See, California Sex Offender Management Board’s 2010 Recommendations Report. https://casomb.org/docs/CASOMB%20Report%20Jan%202010_Final%20Report.pdf (Jan. 2010), p. 50; Sen. Com. on Public Safety, Analysis of Senate Bill No. 421 (2017-18 Reg. Sess.) as amended Apr. 17, 2017, p. 9.; and Justice Policy Institute, [Registries and notification have not been proven to protect communities from sexual offenses, and may even distract from more effective approaches. https://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/resource_840.pdf.) ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Jesse Arreguín, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: SB 680 Hearing Date: April 8, 2025

Subject: Sex offender registration: unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor

HISTORY

Source: Los Angeles City Attorney

Prior Legislation: SB 1128 (Portantino), held in Assembly Appropriations, 2024
SB 615 (Melendez), Not heard in Senate Public Safety, 2021
SB 145 (Wiener), Chapter 79, Statutes of 2020
AB 884 (Melendez), failed passage in Assembly Public Safety, 2020
SB 384 (Wiener) Chapter 541, Statutes of 2017
AB 1640 (Jones-Sawyer), failed passage on the Assembly Floor, 2014

Support: Arcadia Police Officers’ Association; Brea Police Association; Burbank Police Officers’ Association; California Association of School Police Chiefs; California Coalition of School Safety Professionals; California District Attorneys Association; California Narcotic Officers’ Association; California Reserve Peace Officers Association; Claremont Police Officers Association; Corona Police Officers Association; Culver City Police Officers’ Association; Forgotten Children, Inc.; Fullerton Police Officers’ Association; Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office; Los Angeles School Police Officers Association; Los Angeles School Police Management Association; Murrieta Police Officers’ Association; Newport Beach Police Association; Palos Verdes Police Officers Association; Placer County Deputy Sheriffs’ Association; Pomona Police Officers Association; Riverside Police Officers Association; Riverside Sheriffs’ Association; Santa Ana Police Officers Association; Zoe International

Opposition: ACLU California Action; Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws; California Public Defenders Association; Initiate Justice; Justice2Jobs Coalition; La Defensa; LA County Public Defenders Union, Local 148; San Francisco Public Defender; Smart Justice California

PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to require sex offender registration for a period of 10 years when the person is convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (statutory rape) and the age difference is more than 10 years between the adult and the minor.

Existing law establishes the Sex Offender Registration Act (the Act). (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (a).)

Existing law requires persons convicted of specified sex offenses to register a sex offender, or re-register if the person has been previously registered, upon release from incarceration, placement, commitment, or release on probation. Registration shall consist of all of the following:

• A statement signed in writing by the person, giving information as shall be required by DOJ and giving the name and address of the person's employer, and the address of the person's place of employment, if different from the employer's main address;
• Fingerprints and a current photograph taken by the registering official;
• The license plate number of any vehicle owned by, regularly driven by or registered in the name of the registrant;
• Notice to the person that he or she may have a duty to register in any other state where he or she may relocate; and, Copies of adequate proof of residence, such as a California driver's license or identification card, recent rent or utility receipt or any other information that the registering official believes is reliable. (Pen. Code, § 290.015, subd. (a).)

Existing law provides that a person required to register under the Act has a continuing duty to register even when the underlying conviction has been dismissed, unless that person obtains a certificate of rehabilitation or is exonerated. (Pen. Code, § 290.007.)

Existing law provides that willful violation of any part of the registration requirements constitutes a misdemeanor if the offense requiring registration was a misdemeanor, and constitutes a felony of the offense requiring registration was a felony or if the person has a prior conviction of failing to register. (Pen. Code, § 290.018, subds. (a) and (b).)

Existing law implements, as of January 1, 2021, registration system comprised of three tiers for persons convicted of various offenses for a period of 10 years, 20 years, or life, depending on the nature of the conviction. (Pen. Code, § 290, subds. (d).)

Existing law provides that a person required to register under the Act for an adult court conviction is subject to lifetime registration (tier three), if any of the following apply:

• Following conviction of a registerable offense, the person was subsequently convicted of a violent registerable felony sex offense in a separate proceeding;
• Following conviction of a registerable offense, the person was convicted of a violent felony, committed as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification, for which he or she was ordered to register;
• The person was committed to a state mental hospital as a sexually violent predator;
• The person was convicted of any of the following:
  • murder while attempting to commit or committing a specified sex offense;
  • kidnapping with the intent to commit a specified sex offense;
  • assault with intent to commit a specified sex offense or commission of the same act(s) in the course of a first degree burglary;
  • pimping a minor;
  • pandering with a minor;
  • procurement of a child under age 16 for lewd or lascivious acts;
  • abduction of a minor for purposes of prostitution;
  • aggravated sexual assault of a child;
  • lewd or lascivious acts on a child by force, violence, duress, menace, or fear;
  • lewd or lascivious acts on a child under age 14 or by a caretaker upon a dependent person by force or violence, or lewd acts on a child 14 or 15 years of age by a person at least 10 years older than the child;
  • sending harmful matter to a child that depicts a minor(s) engaged in sexual conduct;
  • contacting a minor with the intent to commit a specified sex offense other than sodomy, oral copulation, or sexual penetration with a person under age 18;
  • contacting a minor with the intent to expose oneself or engage in lewd or lascivious behavior;
  • continuous sexual abuse of a child;
  • sex offense with a child 10 years of age or younger;
  • solicitation of rape, sodomy, or oral copulation by force or violence, or solicitation of other specified sex offenses; and,
  • any offense for which the person is sentenced to a life term under the habitual sex offender law.
• The person's risk level on the static risk assessment instrument for sex offenders (SARATSO) is well above average risk at the time of release into the community;
• The person is a habitual sex offender;
• The person was convicted of lewd or lascivious acts on a child under age 14 in two separate proceedings brought and tried separately;
• The person was sentenced to 15 to 25 years to life for an offense under the habitual sex offender law;
• The person is required to register as a mentally disordered sex offender;
• The person was convicted of specified felony human trafficking offenses;
• The person was convicted of felony sexual battery by restraint or while the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act;
• The person was convicted of rape of a child, or by force or violence, or where the victim was prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance, or where the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act;
• The person was convicted of spousal rape by force or violence;
• The person was convicted of rape in concert;
• The person was convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor involving lewd or lascivious conduct;
• The person was convicted of sodomy by force or violence, or in concert, or where the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act, or where the victim was prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance;
• The person was convicted of oral copulation upon by force or violence, or in concert, or where the victim is unconscious of the nature of the act, or where the victim was prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance;
• The person was convicted of an act of sexual penetration by force or violence, or where the victim is unconscious of the nature of the act, or where the victim is prevented from resisting by an intoxicating or controlled substance, or where with a child under age 14 and who was more than 10 years younger than the person;
• The person was convicted of child pornography (other than misdemeanor possession of child pornography). (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(3).)

Existing law requires a person who is 18 years of age or older, is convicted on or after January 1, 2025, of solicitation of a minor who was under 16 years of age at the time offense, and who has a previous conviction for the same offense, to register as sex offender if the person was more than 10 years older than the solicited minor, as specified. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(2)(A).)

Existing law provides that unless a person is subject to registration under tier three as specified above, a person required to register under the Act for an adult court conviction of a serious or violent or other specified felony sex offenses must register for a minimum of 20 years (tier two). (Pen. Code, § 290, sub. (d)(2).)

Existing law provides that unless a person is subject to registration under tier two or tier three as specified above, a person required to register under the Act for an adult court conviction of a misdemeanor or non-violent, non-serious sex offense must register for a minimum of 10 years (tier one). (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(1).)

Existing law gives a judge discretion to order sex offender registration for any offense if it finds that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification. (Pen. Code, § 290.006, subd. (a).)

Existing law provides that unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the perpetrator if the person is a minor under 18 years of age. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (a).)

Existing law provides that a person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (b).)

Existing law provides that a person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of a wobbler. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (c).)

Existing law provides that a person 21years of age or older who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who under 16 years of age is guilty of a wobbler. (Pen. Code, § 261.5, subd. (d).)

This bill requires sex offender registration if the defendant is 18 or older, engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, and the minor is more than three years younger than the defendant.

This bill requires registration if the defendant is 21 or older, engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, and the minor is under 16.

This bill provides that, notwithstanding the registration requirements above, a person is not required to register if, at the time of the offense, they are not more than 10 years older than the minor.

COMMENTS

1. Need for This Bill

According to the author:

As an educator and a victim’s advocate, I know that more work needs to be done to protect vulnerable youth and reduce the demand for sex and the human trafficking of minors. It is inexplicable that some sex acts with a minor require sex offender registration but the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, irrespective of the age difference, does not. This is particularly troubling considering the increased risk for unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections that may result from sexual intercourse. SB 680 fixes this discrepancy. This bill will ensure those who engage in the unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three (3) years younger than the offender, or if the offender is over 21 years of age and the minor is under 16 years of age, will be required to register as a Tier 1 sex offender, provided that the offender is more than 10 years older than the minor. This bill seeks to eliminate the current omission in the law that prevents offenders that engage in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor from mandated sex registration. In doing so, the sex offender registry will become a more robust investigative tool for law enforcement, the disparate protections afforded to victims that are currently based upon the specific type of sex act will be eliminated, and the demand for sex and human trafficking of minors will be reduced.

1. Sex Offender Registration Generally

Sex offenders are required to register annually within five working days of their birthday. (Pen. Code, § 290 subd. (b).) If the offender has no fixed address, they are required to register every 30 days. (Pen. Code, § 290.011 subd. (a).) A person is also required to notify law enforcement of any change of address within five days of moving. (Pen. Code, § 290.013.) A person who changes their name is required to inform law enforcement within 5 working days. (Pen. Code, § 290.14, subd. (a).) A person who is required to register their Internet identifiers who adds or changes an Internet identifier is required to report this change within 30 working days of the change. (Pen. Code, § 290.14, subd. (b).)

There are residency restrictions for some individuals required to register as sex offenders. Some sex offender parolees released from prison are prohibited from residing within 2,000 feet of any school and park where children congregate. This determination must be made on a case by case basis, which must be supported by the particularized circumstances of each individual parolee (In re Taylor (2015) 60 Cal.4th 1019).

Existing law also imposes restrictions on persons registered as sex offenders with respect to employment in certain areas, such as in education (Ed. Code, §§ 35021, 44345), community care facilities (Health & Saf. Code, § 1522), residential care facilities (Health & Saf. Code, § 1568.09), residential care facilities for the elderly (Health & Saf. Code, § 1569.17), day care facilities (Health & Saf. Code, § 1596.871), engaging in the business of massage (Gov. Code, § 51032), physicians and surgeons (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2221), registered nurses (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2760.1), and others.

A willful violation of any part of the registration requirements constitutes a misdemeanor if the offense requiring registration was a misdemeanor, and constitutes a felony of the offense requiring registration was a felony or if the person has a prior conviction of failing to register. (Pen. Code, § 290.018, subds. (a) and (b).)

1. History of Sex Offender Registration

California was the first state to require sex offender registration in 1947. The stated purpose for sex offender registration is to deter offenders from committing future crimes, provide law enforcement with an additional investigative tool, and increase public protection. (Wright vs. Superior Court (1997) 15 Cal.4th 521, 526; Alissa Pleau (2007) Review of Selected 2007 California Legislation: Closing a Loophole in California's Sex Offender Registration Laws, 38 McGeorge L.Rev. 276, 277; Hatton vs. Bonner (2004) 365 F.3d 955, 961.) Sex offender registration is a regulatory means of assisting law enforcement in dealing with the problem of recidivist sex offenders. (In re Alval (2004) 33 Cal.4th 254, 279.) Until recently, California was one of the few states that required lifetime registration for all registerable offenses with no discernment. California had thousands of people on the registry that posed no threat to public safety, were deceased, or who had otherwise left the state. The registry was so bloated as to be meaningless in tracking who could be, dangerous people.

In 1996, California enacted Megan's Law allowing the public to access an address list of registered sex offenders. Before 2003, members of the public could only obtain the information on the Megan's Law list by calling a “900” number or visiting certain designated law enforcement agencies and reviewing a CD-ROM. However, in 2003, California required the Department of Justice (DOJ) to put the Megan's Law list of offenders on a public website with the offender's address, photo and list of offenses. (See Pen. Code, § 290.46, subd. (a).) For some offenders with less serious offenses, only their ZIP code is listed. Now, a citizen can enter their address and see if there are registered sex offenders living in the community or even next door.

In 2006 the Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB) was created to examine the state of California’s sex offender laws and to provide the Governor, Legislature, as well as relevant state and local agencies with an assessment of current sex offender management practices and recommended areas of improvement.. (CASOMB Report Jan 2010_Final Report, p. 2 [last visited April 2, 2025]; see also Pen. Code, § 9000, et seq.) The Legislature sought to defer research questions to SOMB given its capacity for detailed analysis of available data and the highly politicized nature of sex offender registration. The SOMB’s highest priority became advocating for a system of tiered registry. Specifically, the SOMB recommended:

California should concentrate state resources on more closely monitoring high-and-moderate risk sex offenders. A sex offender’s risk of re-offense should be one factor in determining the length of time the person must register as a sex offender and whether to post the offender on the Internet; other factors that should determine duration of registration and Internet posting include whether the sex offense was violent, was against a child, involved sexual or violent recidivism, and whether the person was civilly committed as a sexually violent predator. (Id. at p.6.)

1. Tiered Registry and Effects of this Bill

In response to the SOMB recommendations, the Legislature passed SB 384 (Wiener) Chapter 541, Statutes of 2017, which established a three-tiered registration system based on seriousness of the crime, risk of sexual reoffending, and criminal history. Duration of registration would range from 10 years to lifetime registration.

According to the Senate Public Safety Committee’s analysis for the bill, which started off as SB 421 (Wiener) of that same year:

Based on a survey of several municipal law enforcement agencies in California, it is estimated that local law enforcement agencies spend between 60-66% of their resources dedicated for sex offender supervision on monthly or annual registration paperwork because of the large numbers of registered sex offenders on our registry. If we can remove low risk offenders from the registry it will free up law enforcement officers to monitor the high risk offenders living in our communities. Law enforcement cannot protect the community effectively when they are in the office doing monthly or annual paperwork for low risk offenders, when they could be out in the community monitoring high risk offenders. Furthermore, the public is overwhelmed by the number of offenders displayed online in each neighborhood and do not know which offenders are considered low risk and which offenders are considered high risk and therefore truly dangerous.

(Sen. Com. on Public Safety, Analysis of Senate Bill No. 421 (2017-18 Reg. Sess.) as amended Apr. 17, 2017, p. 9.)

The tiered registry categories are as follows: A tier one offender is someone who is required to register for a misdemeanor sex offense or a felony conviction that is not a serious or violent felony. Tier one requires a person to register for a minimum of 10 years. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(1).) A tier two offender is a person who is required to register for a felony that is defined as a serious or violent felony or other specified sex offenses, unless the person is otherwise required to register under tier three. Tier two requires a person to register for a minimum of 20 years. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(2).) A tier three offender is a person who is convicted a specified offense or under the one-strike sex law, or is designated as a sexually violent predator or habitual sex offender, in addition to other qualifying offenses and circumstances. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (d)(3).)

According to the SOMB, some recommendations were ignored and discrepancies resulted:

Years were spent by the CASOMB (a multidisciplinary board that includes victim advocates, law enforcement, district attorney, defense attorney, judge, treatment providers, and other key stakeholders) and district attorneys to create a responsible and evidence informed bill. The bill was co-sponsored by Los Angeles District Attorneys, Equality California, and California Coalition against Sexual Assault (victim advocates) and received no formal opposition.

Through the amendment process, several changes were made to the well thought out and written proposal that affected tier placement for certain types of offense behavior. In its original version, it passed through the assembly public safety and senate public safety committees. It was modified as a condition of being released from the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

In this gut and amend process, many offense behaviors were moved from tiers 1 and 2 and placed into Tier 3. In examining Tier 3, the CASOMB recognizes that it requires amending as some of the offenses that were placed in Tier 3 were not research informed decisions. Tier 3 was intended for individuals with lifetime prison sentences, individuals found to meet the criteria under the Sexually Violent Predator Act, Mentally Disordered Offenders with increased risk of re-offense, and individuals with more than one separately tried sexual offense conviction against a minor. The changes recommended by the CASOMB are the first steps in restoring the original intent of the bill. (See SOMB December 2023 Report, p. 5 https://casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=1211.)

The SOMB explained some of the tiered registration mistakes:

Placing individuals with a conviction of PC 288(c)(1) on Tier 3, is not consistent with the current legal continuum for sentencing. Individuals convicted under PC 261.5. subdivision (d) - unlawful sexual intercourse, sentencing includes a range of 1 year for misdemeanors, and 2, 3, or 4 years for felonies and does not require registration. Individuals convicted for PC 288(a) – Lewd and Lascivious acts with a minor under the age of 14 are placed in Tier 2. Individuals convicted for PC 288(a) have more severe sentences. The statute states, “they shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, by three, six, or eight years.” While those convicted for PC 288(c)(1) “shall be punished by one, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year.” PC 667.5 defines Section (a) as a serious offense, which allows for them to stay on probation for 5 years. (SOMB December 2023 Report, supra, at pp. 8-9.)

The discrepancy can be seen in the table below:

(Id. at p. 9.)

In this 2023 report, the SOMB makes several recommended changes for offenses in the tiered registry and points to the disparities between these crimes that resulted from last minute amendments to the tiered registry legislation. (Id. at pp. 5-9.) Notably, the SOMB did not mention requiring registration for the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, which is what this bill proposes.

Additionally, it should be noted that even before tiered registration, the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor did not require sex offender registration.^[1] It should also be noted that a court may already order a person not otherwise required to register as a sex offender if they find that the person committed the offense as a result of sexual compulsion or for the purposes of sexual gratification. (Pen. Code, § 290.006.)

Given that a court may already issue registration requirements where appropriate for the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, does it make sense to mandate registration for this offense as proposed by this bill? Arguably, doing so will only further exacerbate the discrepancies and unintended consequences that resulted in the tiered registry system when the recommendations of the SOMB were ignored.

1. Human Trafficking

The author and the sponsor state that requiring sex offender registration for the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor is needed to curb human trafficking and to protect victims of human trafficking who are minors.

However, the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor does not necessarily involve human trafficking. If there is any evidence of trafficking – it begs the question – why is the prosecutor not seeking a charge pursuant to Penal Code section 236.1? The crime of human trafficking already requires sex offender registration. (See Pen. Code, § 290, subds. (c)(1) & (d)(3)(I).) Moreover, an adult defendant who is convicted on or after January 1, 2025, of soliciting a minor when the defendant knew or should have known the person solicited was a minor, and who has a prior conviction for solicitation of a minor, shall be required to register as a sex offender if the adult defendant was more than 10 years older than the solicited minor. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (c)(2)(A).) Thus, human trafficking already requires sex offender registration.

1. Argument in Support

According to the Los Angeles City Attorney, the sponsor of this bill:

According to the California Attorney General, “human trafficking is among the world’s fastest growing criminal enterprises and is estimated to be a $150 billion-a-year global industry,” which according to the California Child Welfare Council, involves over 100,000 children in the United States. Within the United States, California consistently ranks number one in the nation in the number of human trafficking cases reported to the National Human Trafficking Hotline and, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Los Angeles ranks near the top of the nation’s high intensity child prostitution areas. In acknowledging the prevalence and serious nature of this crime, the California Attorney General notes that young girls and women account for 99.4% of sex trafficking victims.

These statistics highlight the need to do more to protect vulnerable youth and reduce the demand for the sex trafficking of minors. SB 680 answers this call. By requiring sex offender registration for those who engage in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, when the offender is more than 10 years older than the minor victim, SB 680 will help deter the sexual exploitation of children and hold those who prey upon them accountable.

Moreover SB 680 fixes the current disparity that treats sex acts differently. It is inexplicable that some sex acts with a minor currently require sex offender registration but unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, irrespective of the age difference, does not. This disparity in the law in nonsensical considering the increased risks of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infection that may result from sexual intercourse. According to the California Department of Public Health, unintended adolescent pregnancies often lead to socioeconomic and health related challenges for the adolescent and their children. SB 680 recognizes this aggravated harm and, similar to how the law treats other sex acts with a minor, appropriately requires an offender who engaged in sexual intercourse with a minor to register in the sex offender registry.

1. Argument in Opposition

According to the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws:

If enacted into law, SB 680 could dramatically increase the number of Californians required to register as a sex offender. In fact, the California Department of Justice has estimated that SB 680 could add up to 30,000 individuals to the state’s sex offender registry which is already the largest registry in the nation.

Specifically, SB 680 targets more than 30,000 individuals previously convicted of Penal Code 261.5, which was formerly known as statutory rape. These individuals have never been required to register as a sex offender and because SB 680 would be applied retroactively, they would be required to register for the first time even if they were convicted decades ago.

Also, if enacted into law, SB 680 would defeat the purpose of the Tiered Registry Law (SB 384) which was approved by the legislature and enacted into law in 2017. The purpose of that law was to reduce a bloated and ineffective registry that was both costly and failed to increase public safety.

Further, SB 680 would require extensive research by the California Department of Justice to identify and locate individuals convicted of PC 261.5 decades ago. This research would include the ages of both the perpetrator and the victim because SB 680 would apply only to cases in which there was an age difference of four years or more.

Finally, the registration requirements of SB 680 would adversely affect up to 30,000 individuals and their families due to challenges faced by every person required to register. Those challenges include, but are not limited to, unemployment or underemployment as well as reduced housing options that could lead to homelessness.

-- END –

1. In 2016, Penal Code section 290, subdivision (c) provided: The following persons shall be required to register: Any person who, since July 1, 1944, has been or is hereafter convicted in any court in this state or in any federal or military court of a violation of Section 187 committed in the perpetration, or an attempt to perpetrate, rape or any act punishable under Section 286, 288, 288a, or 289, Section 207 or 209 committed with intent to violate Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, Section 220, except assault to commit mayhem, subdivision (b) and (c) of Section 236.1, Section 243.4, paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 261, paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 262 involving the use of force or violence for which the person is sentenced to the state prison, Section 264.1, 266, or 266c, subdivision (b) of Section 266h, subdivision (b) of Section 266i, Section 266j, 267, 269, 285, 286, 288, 288a, 288.3, 288.4, 288.5, 288.7, 289, or 311.1, subdivision (b), (c), or (d) of Section 311.2, Section 311.3, 311.4, 311.10, 311.11, or 647.6, former Section 647a, subdivision (c) of Section 653f, subdivision 1 or 2 of Section 314, any offense involving lewd or lascivious conduct under Section 272, or any felony violation of Section 288.2; any statutory predecessor that includes all elements of one of the above-mentioned offenses; or any person who since that date has been or is hereafter convicted of the attempt or conspiracy to commit any of the above-mentioned offenses. ↑