Valverde

United States v. Valverde

Good Law
628 F.3d 1159·2010 WL 5263142·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 26211
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 27, 201009-10063California4,705 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

The Government appeals a decision of the district court dismissing the indictment of Mark Anthony Valverde (“Valverde”) under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”), 42 U.S.C. § 16901 et seq., on the ground that the registration and penalty provisions of the statute under which Valverde was charged, 42 U.S.C. § 16913 ; 18 U.S.C. § 2250 (a)(2)(B), are invalid exercises of congressional power under the Commerce Clause. U.S. Const, art. I, § 8, cl. 3. We stayed this matter pending a decision on that issue in United States v. George, 625 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir.2010). Valverde contends in addition that no valid statute or properly promulgated rule made SORNA’s registration requirements applicable to him as of the time that he is charged with failing to register, specifically in January 2008.

We lift the stay issued pending the panel’s decision in George and reject Valverde’s Commerce Clause argument in light of that decision. We AFFIRM, however, the district court’s dismissal of the indictment. We do so on the separate ground that the Attorney General’s interim regulation of February 28, 2007 — applying SORNA’s registration requirements retroactively to sex…

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.