Effective Dates for the Satellite-Based Monitoring Law

The court of appeals decided two satellite-based monitoring cases last week, State v. May and State v. Cowan. The May case—which primarily orders the correction of a clerical error—reminds us that as used in the sex offender context, “offense against a minor” does not mean any sex crime that happens to be against a minor. Rather, it is a defined term referring to three specific offenses, committed against a minor by a person other than his or her parent: kidnapping, abduction of children, and felonious restraint. G.S. 14-208.6(1m). Most reportable crimes are actually “sexually violent offenses” as defined in G.S. 14-208.6(5), and that is the box (1b. in the “Findings” section) that should typically be checked on form AOC-CR-615. Cowan is more noteworthy. It covers new ground by answering a longstanding question about satellite-based monitoring: what is the law’s effective date? In Cowan, the defendant was initially charged with rape and other crimes for a sexual assault on a four-year-old girl on April 1, 2005. Ultimately, on August 29, 2007, he pled guilty to one count of solicitation to commit indecent liberties with a child, for which he received probation. Cowan’s suspended sentence was activated in early 2008. Just prior to his release from DOC, he received notice of a hearing to determine whether he would be required to enroll in SBM. At the hearing the court determined that Cowan had committed an offense “involv[ing] the physical, mental, and sexual abuse of a minor” and ordered him to enroll in SBM [...]