Schoop

*463 Opinion

Defendant was ordered to register as a sex offender after he pleaded no contest to a violation of Penal Code section 311.1 1 in connection with his possession of pornography. He later sought a certificate of rehabilitation (§ 4852.01 et seq.), so that he could be relieved of the registration requirement. Because an amendment to the sex offender registration law after his conviction had the effect of lengthening the time period he was required to wait before seeking a certificate, the trial court denied defendant’s petition, concluding that he was not yet eligible to seek relief. Defendant challenges the denial on several grounds, one of which has merit. We conclude that subjecting defendant to a longer rehabilitation procedure denies defendant equal protection of the laws, because persons similarly situated are not so restricted. We therefore reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

I.

Factual and Procedural Background

The following facts are taken primarily from the exhibits submitted to the trial court in connection with defendant’s petition for a certificate of rehabilitation. According to a probation report, police discovered “a large…