The People v. Moore CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 2013E056081California5,542 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

As of 1985, defendant was required by certain convictions to register as a sex

offender within the State of California. By May 2003, defendant was living in a transient

camp under a bridge in the riverbed of the Santa Ana River. Many transients lived along

the riverbed near the encampment where defendant was staying. Part of the riverbed fell

into the jurisdiction of the City of Jurupa Valley, while part was within the jurisdiction of

the City of Riverside. Some of the transients in the camp registered at the Jurupa Valley

police station. Defendant had always registered in Riverside County, and had never

registered in Jurupa Valley. However, defendant had registered regularly; he updated his

registration 17 times altogether, and had registered in Riverside County nine times. He

had registered in the City of Riverside seven times.

In Riverside County, registered sex offenders were also given and required to wear

a global positioning system (GPS) tracking device. The purpose of the tracking device

was to ensure that a registered sex offender did not come within 2,000 feet of a school or

park. In defendant’s case, his tracking device was…

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.