Vincelli

People v. Vincelli

Good Law
132 Cal. App. 4th 646·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1412·2005 Daily Journal DAR 11061·33 Cal. Rptr. 3d 839·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8187
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 2005No. C046512California2,882 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Raye, J.

Defendant Garry Lee Vincelli was convicted of failing to register as a sex offender after changing his name. (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (f)(3) (hereafter section 290(f)(3)).) 1 He was sentenced to two years in prison.

On appeal, defendant contends the phrase “changes his or her name” in section 290(f)(3) is unconstitutionally vague as applied to him because it *649 failed to provide him notice of what he needed to do to conform to the registration requirement and impermissibly allowed the jury to decide its meaning on an ad hoc and subjective basis. We shall affirm the judgment.

FACTS

In 1975 defendant was convicted of forcible rape and, as a result, was required to register as a sex offender. He registered as a sex offender with the Redding Police Department under the name “Garry Lee Vincelli” on June 24, 1999; July 9, 1999; July 10, 2000; July 9, 2001; November 26, 2001; July 8, 2002; and July 8, 2003.

In November 1995 defendant was issued a California identification card by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in the name “Jerry Lee Binelli.” In September 1997 he was issued a California driver’s license by the DMV in the name “Jerry Lee Binelli.” The Redding Police…

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.