P. v. Harris
Defendant Sean Walter Harris, previously convicted of a registrable sex offense, appeals his conviction for failing to register within five days of a change of his residence, in violation of the Sex Offender Registration Act (the Act), Penal Code[1] section 290 et seq. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in rejecting his request that the jury be informed, as he was prepared to stipulate, that he was required to register, without indicating the nature of the offense giving rise to the registration requirement, and that he was then denied due process when the jury was informed, pursuant to stipulation, that he was previously convicted of oral copulation of a 14-year-old girl. We conclude that the trial court correctly ruled that the prosecution was entitled to inform the jury that defendant had previously been convicted of a sexual offense, and it did not err, or deny defendant due process, in advising the jury pursuant to stipulation of the nature of the sexual offense. Nor did defendant receive ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney opted to have the jury advised of the nature of the prior sex offense, fearing that the jury might suspect something worse if not told what the offense had been. Thus, Court affirm the judgment of conviction.
Comments on P. v. Harris