People v. Higgenbotham CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 7, 2025G063883California3,281 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sanchez, J.

FACTS

I.

THE CHARGED OFFENSES

Higgenbotham is a transient sex offender subject to mandatory registration under the Sex Offender Registration Act. (§ 290 et seq.) Transient registrants like Higgenbotham must register in whichever jurisdiction they are physically present: (1) within five working days of their birthday; (2) every 30 days; and (3) within five working days of coming into or residing in any city or county. (§§ 290, subd. (b), 290.011, subd. (c).) If the transient registrant leaves the new city or county by the fourth working day, this specific registration requirement would not apply to them. The other requirements nevertheless apply. For 15 years, Higgenbotham successfully complied with the registration requirements, registering over 70 times. Higgenbotham stopped registering after February 23, 2022, and began traveling around California and Arizona. On July 5, 2022, a police officer arrested Higgenbotham in Desert Hot Springs, California, after concluding he was out of compliance with his sex offender registration requirements. The Riverside County District Attorney charged Higgenbotham with two felony counts for failing to register: (1) within five working days of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.