Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
Table of Contents
Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
About
This compendium includes significant criminal cases by the U.S. Supreme Court & N.C. appellate courts, Nov. 2008 – Present. Selected 4th Circuit cases also are included.
Jessica Smith prepared case summaries Nov. 2008-June 4, 2019; later summaries are prepared by other School staff.
Instructions
Navigate using the table of contents to the left or by using the search box below. Use quotations for an exact phrase search. A search for multiple terms without quotations functions as an “or” search. Not sure where to start? The 5 minute video tutorial offers a guided tour of main features – Launch Tutorial (opens in new tab).
(per curiam). Reversing the North Carolina courts, the Court held that under Jones and Jardines, satellite based monitoring for sex offenders constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. The Court stated: “a State … conducts a search when it attaches a device to a person’s body,...
The Court upheld the federal government’s power to civilly commit a mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoner beyond the date the prisoner would otherwise be released from prison. For a more detailed discussion of this case, click here...
The trial court did not err by ordering the defendant to submit to lifetime SBM after he pleaded guilty to first-degree forcible rape and other offenses. In State v. Strudwick, 273 N.C. App. 676 (2020), the Court of...
In this case involving the trial court’s imposition of lifetime satellite-based monitoring (SBM) following the defendant’s conviction for statutory rape of a child by an adult and other sex offenses, the North Carolina Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals erred by allowing the defendant’...
In this case involving the trial court’s imposition of lifetime satellite-based monitoring (SBM) following the defendant’s conviction for an aggravated sex offense, the North Carolina Supreme Court held that the order imposing lifetime SBM effected a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment...
On appeal from a decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 817 S.E.2d 18 (2018), the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision finding satellite-based monitoring (SBM) to be an unreasonable and therefore unconstitutional search in the defendant’s case....
On appeal from a decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 813 S.E.2d 463 (2018), the court held that although the defendant failed to preserve his argument that the trial court erred by imposing lifetime SBM without determining whether the monitoring was a...
The court per curiam affirmed a decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 817 S.E.2d 833 (2018), in which the court declined the defendant’s request to grant his petition for writ of certiorari to review the trial court’s order requiring him to enroll in lifetime...
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that the trial court erred by requiring him to enroll in satellite-based monitoring (SBM). The defendant asserted that the State failed to meet its burden of proving that imposing SBM is reasonable under the fourth amendment....
Because SBM hearings are civil proceedings, the defendant’s oral notice of appeal from an order requiring him to enroll in lifetime SBM was insufficient to give the court jurisdiction to hear his appeal. The court declined to grant the defendant’s request for writ of certiorari to review the...
On an appeal from an order requiring the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM, the court held--as conceded by the State--that the trial court erred by imposing lifetime SBM without conducting the required Grady hearing to determine whether monitoring would amount to a reasonable search...
Subjecting defendants to satellite-based monitoring (SBM) does not violate the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws. The defendants all pleaded guilty to multiple counts of taking indecent liberties with a child; all of the offenses occurred before the SBM statutes took effect....
In this Columbus County case, defendant appealed the denial of his motion for relief from the order imposing lifetime Satellite-Based Monitoring (SBM) for his second-degree rape conviction. The Court of Appeals reversed the denial and remanded to the trial court.
In August of 2021, the...
In this Forsyth County case, defendant appealed the imposition of lifetime satellite-based monitoring (SBM) after his classification as an aggravated offender for convictions for rape, indecent liberties with a child, assault by strangulation, and kidnapping. The Court of Appeals affirmed the...
In this Forsyth County case, the defendant was convicted of multiple sex crimes in 2020. Based on a prior conviction from 2002, he was deemed to be a recidivist and ordered to enroll in satellite-based monitoring (SBM). Though the SBM statute in effect at the time would have required...
In this Caldwell County case, the defendant was charged with first-degree sex offense with a child. The victim was the minor child of a family friend. While the child was watching television at the defendant’s house, the defendant brought the child to his computer, which had pornography playing...
The defendant was convicted of first-degree rape, kidnapping, and sex offense in Alamance County and sentenced to a minimum 420 months. The trial court ordered lifetime satellite-based monitoring (“SBM”), but no Grady hearing was conducted. The defendant sought...
In this Iredell County case, the defendant was convicted of multiple counts of indecent liberties with a minor. He was ordered to enroll in satellite-based monitoring (“SBM”) for life as a recidivist offender. The North Carolina Supreme Court later decided State v. Grady...
In this sex offense and indecent liberties case where the defendant was ordered to enroll in lifetime SBM, the trial court did not plainly err with respect to an Allen charge, the defendant did not preserve his argument related to SBM, and the defendant received...
The defendant pleaded guilty to raping and murdering his aunt, and received a sentence of 240-348 months for the rape followed by a consecutive sentence of life with parole for the murder. On appeal, the defendant argued that: (i) a consecutive sentence of life with parole was not...
The defendant appealed from his convictions for first degree rape, first degree sexual offense, and taking indecent liberties with a child. The defendant also challenged a civil order requiring lifetime SBM. Defendant was charged with first degree rape of a child, first degree sex offense...
The defendant appealed from judgments entered upon his guilty pleas to second-degree rape and forcible sex offenses, second-degree kidnapping, assault on female, assault by strangulation, obstruction of justice, and intimidating a witness. The defendant appealed by writ of certiorari both...
In a prior opinion, the Court of Appeals held that the state failed to meet its burden of showing the reasonableness of ordering the defendant to enroll in lifetime satellite-based monitoring (SBM) following his conviction for rape. The matter was before the court again for reconsideration...
The defendant was convicted at trial of numerous sex offenses against minor children, including statutory sex offense, sexual activity by substitute parent, and sale of controlled substances to minors in Cleveland County. He was sentenced to a minimum of 600 months and ordered to enroll in...
In this case involving rape and other sex crimes where the defendant was ordered to enroll in lifetime SBM, the court of appeals vacated the order imposing SBM because of uncertainty surrounding the evidentiary basis of the trial court’s decision. With regard to the issue of efficacy of...
In this rape and sex offense case, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s order imposing lifetime SBM. First addressing its appellate jurisdiction, the court explained that it allowed the defendant’s petition for writ of certiorari in its discretion, notwithstanding procedural defects...
In this Catawba County case, the defendant pled guilty to five counts of indecent liberties with a minor in lieu of other related charges, including possession of child pornography and other sexual assaults on children. The State argued for the imposition of satellite-based monitoring (“SBM”),...
The defendant pleaded guilty in 2017 to multiple sexual offenses and was sentenced to 190-288 months. After determining that the convictions qualified as “aggravated offenses” under G.S. 14-208.6(1A), the court conducted a satellite-based monitoring (SBM) hearing. Evidence at the hearing...
The defendant was charged with four counts of engaging in sexual acts against a child under 13 and taking indecent liberties with a child. The defendant was alleged to have touched a child, A.M.D., in sexual manner on several occasions over a period of one to two years. The state’s...
In State v. Grady, 372 N.C. 509 (2019), the North Carolina Supreme Court held that lifetime satellite- based monitoring (SBM) is unconstitutional as applied to any person who is ordered to enroll in SBM because he or she is a recidivist. The Court held that SBM in those circumstances...
This case was before the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of State v. Grady, ___ N.C. ___, 831 S.E.2d 542 (2019). The court’s prior opinion is State v. Dravis, ___ N.C. App. ___, 817 S.E.2d 796 (2018) (...
The court reversed the trial court’s order requiring the defendant to submit to lifetime satellite-based monitoring (SBM) on the basis that it ordered an unreasonable search. Though the State mentioned statistics and studies related to the risk of recidivism posed by sex offenders in its...
Over a dissent in this SBM case, the court relied on State v. Griffin, ___ N.C. App. ___, 818 S.E.2d 336 (2018) to vacate the trial court’s imposition of lifetime satellite-based monitoring of the defendant. Under Griffin, “trial courts cannot impose satellite-based monitoring unless...
In a case where the defendant was convicted of taking indecent liberties with a child, the court held that the State failed to meet its burden of showing the reasonableness of the SBM program as applied to the defendant by failing to produce evidence concerning the efficacy of the program. It...
In this second-degree rape case, the trial court erred by ordering lifetime SBM where the State did not meet its burden of proving that SBM was a reasonable Fourth Amendment search. The United States Supreme Court has held that SBM is a search. Therefore, before subjecting a defendant to SBM,...
Because no evidence was presented prior to or to support the trial court’s lifetime SBM order, the court vacated that order and remanded for proper analysis and determination under G.S. 14-208.40A.
As conceded by the State, the trial court erred by ordering the defendant to enroll in SBM. The Static-99 risk assessment of “Moderate-Low” without additional findings by the trial court was insufficient to support the trial court’s conclusion that the defendant requires the highest level of...
Citing prior case law, the court held that because the trial court failed to conduct a hearing to determine whether it would be constitutional to subject the defendant to SBM upon his release from a prison sentence for rape, the trial court’s order enrolling the defendant in SMB for life must be...
The court vacated the trial court’s order requiring lifetime SBM, concluding that the State cannot establish, at this time, that the defendant’s submission to SBM will constitute a reasonable fourth amendment search when the defendant is eventually released from prison. After the defendant...
Following State v. Grady, __ N.C. App. __, __ S.E.2d __ (May 15, 2018), the court held, over a dissent, that absent any evidence that SBM is effective to protect the public from sex offenders, the trial court erred by imposing SBM for 30 years. The defendant proffered an Alford plea to...
The court reversed the trial court’s lifetime registration and SBM orders. When a trial court finds a person was convicted of a “reportable conviction,” it must order that person to maintain sex offender registration for a period of at least 30 years. If a trial court also finds that the person...
The defendant failed to preserve the claim that the trial court erred by ordering him to enroll in SBM without conducting a Grady hearing to determine whether the monitoring was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. After a jury convicted the defendant of taking indecent liberties with his...
The court declined to issue a writ of certiorari to consider the defendant’s argument that the trial court erred in finding that he was a recidivist and thus qualified for lifetime SBM. The defendant failed to timely appeal on this ground. The court declined to issue the writ because the...
The trial court erred by imposing satellite-based monitoring for a period of thirty years due to a violation of G.S. 14-208.40A. Here, the Static-99 revealed a risk assessment of four points, which translated into a “Moderate-High” risk category. Pursuant to existing law, the “Moderate-High”...
(1) The trial court erred by ordering lifetime registration for the defendant. Although the defendant was convicted of reportable convictions and is therefore required to register as a sex offender, neither sexual offense with a child under G.S. 14-27.4A(a) nor sexual activity by a substitute...
In this appeal from the trial court’s order imposing SBM, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the state’s SBM laws are facially unconstitutional but remanded for a determination of the reasonableness of the imposition of SBM. Before the trial court, the defendant argued that...
(1) The court rejected the defendant’s argument that because SBM is a civil, regulatory scheme, it is subject to the Rules of Civil Procedure and that the trial court erred by failing to exercise discretion under Rule 62(d) to stay the SBM hearing. The court concluded that because Rule 62...
The trial court erred by failing to conduct the appropriate analysis with respect to the defendant’s argument that SMB constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure. The trial court simply acknowledged that SBM constitutes a search and summarily concluded that the search was reasonable. As such...
Relying on prior binding opinions, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court’s order directing the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM violated ex post facto and double jeopardy. The court noted that prior opinions have held that the SBM program is a civil regulatory...
Relying on prior binding opinions, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court’s order directing the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM violated ex post facto and double jeopardy. The court noted that prior opinions have held that the SBM program is a civil regulatory...
The trial court erroneously concluded that attempted second-degree rape is an aggravated offense for purposes of lifetime SBM and lifetime sex offender registration. Pursuant to the statute, an aggravated offense requires a sexual act involving an element of penetration. Here, the defendant was...
The trial court’s conclusion that the defendant was a recidivist was not supported by competent evidence and therefore could not support the conclusion that the defendant must submit to lifetime sex offender registration and SBM. The trial court’s order determining that the defendant was a...
Ineffective assistance of counsel claims cannot be asserted in SBM appeals; such claims can only be asserted in criminal matters.
In this indecent liberties case, the trial court did not err by considering evidence regarding the age of the alleged victims, the temporal proximity of the events, and the defendant’s increasing sexual aggressiveness; making findings of fact based on this evidence; and imposing SBM. Although...
The State conceded and the court held that the trial court erred by requiring the defendant to submit to lifetime SBM. The trial court imposed SBM based on its determination that the defendant’s conviction for first-degree rape constituted an “aggravated offense” as defined by G.S. 14-208.6(1a...
The trial court did not err by ordering the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the SBM statute violates substantive due process by impermissibly infringing upon his right to be free from government monitoring of his location. The court also...
The trial court erred by requiring the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM. Two of the trial court’s additional findings supporting its order that the defendant—who tested at moderate-low risk on the Static 99—enroll in lifetime SBM were not supported by the evidence. Also, the additional...
The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hold the SBM hearing in Craven County. The requirement that the SBM hearing be held in the county in which the defendant resides relates to venue and the defendant’s failure to raise the issue...
The trial court did not err by requiring the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM after finding at the bring-back hearing that he committed an aggravated offense, second-degree rape on a physically helpless victim (G.S. 14-27.3(a)(2)). The court followed State v. Oxendine, 206 N.C. App....
(1) Although the State presented no evidence at the bring-back hearing establishing that the defendant received proper notice by certified mail of the hearing or that he received notice of the basis upon which the State believed him eligible for SBM, by failing to object to the trial court’s...
Where the defendant was convicted of first-degree statutory rape the trial court did not err by ordering the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM upon release from imprisonment. The offense of conviction involved vaginal penetration and force and thus was an aggravated offense.
The trial court erred by ordering lifetime sex offender registration and lifetime SBM because first-degree sexual offense is not an “aggravated offense” within the meaning of the sex offender statutes.
The trial court erred by requiring the defendant to enroll in SBM. After finding that the defendant did not fall into any of the categories requiring SBM under G.S. 14-208.40, the trial court nonetheless ordered SBM enrollment for 30 years, on grounds that his probation was revoked and he failed...
There was sufficient evidence that the defendant was a recidivist for purposes of lifetime SBM. The prior record worksheet and defense counsel’s stipulation to the prior convictions support a finding that the defendant had been convicted of indecent liberties in 2005, even though it appears that...
(1) The trial court erred by concluding that the defendant required the highest level of supervision and monitoring and ordering him to enroll in SBM for ten years when the STATIC-99 risk assessment classified him as a low risk and the trial court’s additional findings were not supported by the...
The trial court erred by ordering the defendant to enroll in lifetime satellite-based monitoring based on its determination that second-degree sexual offense was an aggravating offense. Considering the elements of the offense, second-degree sexual offense is not an aggravated offense.
(1) The DOC gave sufficient notice of a SBM hearing when its letter informed the defendant of both the hearing date and applicable statutory category. (2) The court rejected the defendant’s argument that SBM infringed on his constitutional right to travel.
The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to conduct an SBM determination hearing because the DOC did not file a complaint or issue a summons to the defendant as required by the Rules of Civil Procedure. The court concluded that G.S. 14-208.40B(b), “...
(1) Following prior case law, the court held that taking indecent liberties with a child is not an aggravated offense for purposes of lifetime SBM. (2) Relying on State v. Clark, 211 N.C. App. 60 (Apr. 19, 2011) (first-degree statutory rape involving a victim under 13 is an aggravated...
The trial court erroneously required the defendant to enroll in lifetime SBM on the basis that first-degree sexual offense was an aggravated offense. The court reiterated that first-degree sexual offense is not an aggravated offense. The court remanded for a risk assessment and a new SBM hearing...
The trial court erred by ordering lifetime SBM. The trial court concluded that the defendant was not a sexually violent predator or a recidivist and that although the offenses involved the physical, mental, or sexual abuse of a minor, he did not require the highest possible level of supervision...
(1) The court rejected the defendant’s argument that since no civil summons was issued, the trial court had no jurisdiction to impose SBM; the trial court had jurisdiction under G.S. 14-208.40A to order SBM. (2) The trial judge erroneously concluded that the defendant had a reportable conviction...
The trial court erred by finding that sex offense in a parental role (G.S. 14-27.7(a)) is an aggravated offense.
The trial court erred by requiring the defendant to enroll in satellite-based monitoring (SBM) for ten years after finding that he required the highest level of supervision and monitoring. The DOC risk assessment classified the defendant as a low risk and only two of the trial court’s four...
Citing State v. Cowan, 207 N.C. App. 192, 204 (Sept. 21, 2010), the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court erred by determining that indecent liberties involved the physical, mental, or sexual abuse of a minor.
(1) The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to order SBM enrollment because the State failed to file a written pleading providing notice regarding the basis for SBM. (2) The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court...
The trial court erred by ordering the defendant to enroll in lifetime satellite-based monitoring. The defendant was convicted of attempted first-degree rape under G.S. 14-27.2, and indecent liberties under G.S. 14-202.1, both sexually violent offenses and thus reportable convictions. At the...
Citing State v. Clark, 211 N.C. App. 60 (Apr. 19, 2011), the court held that because rape of a child under the age of 13 necessarily involves the use of force or threat of serious violence, the offense is an aggravated offense requiring lifetime SBM. In dicta, it concluded: “Under the...
Although one of its factual findings was erroneous, the trial court did not err by requiring the defendant to enroll in SBM for five years after finding that he required the highest possible level of supervision.The trial court based its conclusion on a DOC risk assessment of “moderate-low” and...
Applying an elemental analysis, the court determined that first-degree rape under G.S. 14-27.2(a)(1) fits within the definition of an aggravated offense in G.S. 14-208.6(1a). An aggravated offense includes engaging in a sexual act involving vaginal, anal, or oral penetration with a victim (1) of...
First-degree sexual offense under G.S. 14-27.4(a)(1) and indecent liberties with a minor under G.S. 14-202.1 are not aggravated offenses as defined by G.S. 14-208.6(1a) requiring lifetime satellite-based monitoring.
The trial court erred by finding that first-degree sexual offense with a child under 13 is an aggravated offense for purposes of ordering lifetime satellite-based monitoring (SBM). As the State conceded, when making the relevant determination, the trial court only is to consider the elements of...
(1) The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to order the defendant to enroll in satellite-based monitoring (SBM) after a district court conviction for misdemeanor attempted sexual battery. G.S. 14-208.40B(b) requires that SBM hearings be held in superior court for the county in...
Following State v. Phillips, 203 N.C. App. 326 (2010), the court held that first-degree sexual offense under G.S. 14-27.4(a)(1) (child victim under 13) is not an aggravated offense for purposes of SBM. To be an aggravated offense, the child must be less than 12 years old; “a child under...
Following prior case law, the court rejected the defendant’s arguments that SBM violates prohibitions against ex post facto and double jeopardy.
The trial court erred in requiring lifetime SBM under G.S. 14-208.40(a)(2); that provision subjects a person to SBM for a term of years.
The defendant did not receive adequate notice of the basis for the Department of Correction’s preliminary determination that he should be required to enroll in SBM under the version of G.S. 14-208.40B(b) applicable to the defendant’s case. Specifically the notice failed to specify the category...
G.S. 14-208.40B (procedure for determining SBM eligibility when eligibility was not determined when judgment was imposed) applies to SBM proceedings initiated after December 1, 2007, even if those proceedings involve offenders who had been sentenced or had committed the offenses that resulted in...
Assuming without deciding that an elements-based approach should be used when determining eligibility for SBM under G.S. 14-208.40(a)(2), the trial court did not err by requiring the defendant, who had pleaded guilty to solicitation of indecent liberties, to enroll in SBM on the grounds that the...
Because the trial court previously held a hearing pursuant to G.S. 14-208.40B (SBM determination after sentencing) and determined that the defendant was not required to enroll in SBM, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to later hold a second SBM hearing on the same reportable conviction. In...
Following Kilby and Causby, the court held that the trial court erroneously determined that the defendant required the highest level of supervision and monitoring. The Static 99 concluded that the defendant posed a low risk of re-offending and no other evidence supported the...
Following McCravey, the court granted the State’s petition for writ of certiorari and remanded for entry of an order requiring lifetime SBM enrollment on the basis of the defendant’s second-degree rape conviction, which involved a mentally disabled victim. A concurring opinion agreed...
Sexual battery is not an aggravated offense for the purposes of SBM.
Following Singleton and holding that indecent liberties is not an aggravated offense.
A defendant’s appeal from a trial court’s order requiring enrollment in SBM for life is a civil matter. Thus, oral notice of appeal pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 4(a)(1) is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the court of appeals. Instead, a defendant must give notice of appeal pursuant to N.C.R...
Remanding for a determination of whether the defendant required the highest level of supervision and monitoring. Although the DOC’s risk assessment indicated that the defendant was a moderate risk, there was evidence that he had violated six conditions of probation, including failure to be at...
Applying the “elements test,” second-degree rape committed by force and against the victim’s will is an aggravated offense triggering lifetime SBM.
The statutory definition of an aggravated offense in G.S. 14-208.6(1a) is not unconstitutionally vague for failure to define the term “use of force.”
Following Davison and holding that when considering whether a pleaded-to offense is an aggravated one for purposes of SBM, the trial court may look only to the elements of the offense, and not at the factual basis for the plea. In this case, the defendant pleaded guilty to felonious...
Once the trial judge determines that the defendant has been convicted of such an offense, the trial judge should order the DOC to perform a risk assessment. The trial court then must decide, based on the risk assessment and any other evidence presented, whether defendant requires “the highest...
Following Davison and holding that the pleaded-to offense of indecent liberties was not an aggravated offense under the elements test.
Because a SBM order is a final judgment from the superior court, the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to consider appeals from SBM monitoring determinations under G.S. 14-208.40B pursuant to G.S. 7A-27.
Statutory rape constitutes an offense involving the physical, mental, or sexual abuse of a minor. Once the trial judge determines that the defendant has been convicted of such an offense, the trial judge should order the DOC to perform a risk assessment. The trial court then must decide, based...
Remanding for failure to properly conduct the SBM determination, as outlined in the court’s opinion. The court also held that when determining whether an offense is an aggravated offense for purposes of SBM, the trial court may look only at the elements of the conviction offense and may not...
It was error for the trial court to order that the defendant enroll in SBM for a period of 7-10 years; G.S. 14-208.40B(c) requires the trial court to set a definite period of time for SBM enrollment.
Requiring enrollment in the SBM program deprives an offender of a significant liberty interest, triggering procedural due process protections. The State violated the defendant’s procedural due process rights by failing to give him sufficient notice in advance of the SBM hearing of the basis for...
In determining whether the defendant requires the highest possible level of supervision and monitoring, the trial court may consider any evidence relevant to the defendant’s risk and is not limited to the DOC’s risk assessment. Because evidence supporting a finding of high risk was presented in...
Following Kilby (discussed immediately above), on similar facts.
The trial judge erred in concluding that the defendant required the highest possible level of supervision and monitoring when the Department of Correction risk assessment found that the defendant posed only a moderate risk and trial judge made no findings of fact that would support its...
Because SBM is civil in nature, its imposition does not violate a defendant’s right to be free from double jeopardy.
Affirming the trial court’s order requiring the defendant to enroll in SBM for life as a recidivist based on convictions for indecent liberties with a minor in 1989 and 2006. The defendant’s bring-back hearing was held in January, 2008, days before his release from prison. The defendant argued...
Affirming the trial court’s order requiring the defendant to enroll in SBM for life as a recidivist based on convictions for indecent liberties with a minor in 1989 and 2006. The defendant argued that his 1989 conviction for indecent liberties should not qualify him as a recidivist because that...