Johnson v. Department of Justice
California Supreme Court
1Dissent
WERDEGAR, J.,
Dissenting. — Because the majority, as I explain, unnecessarily overrules this court’s precedent in People v. Hofsheier (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1185 [39 Cal.Rptr.3d 821, 129 P.3d 29] (Hofsheier), I respectfully dissent.
Petitioner, convicted of oral copulation with a person under 16 years of age (Pen. Code, § 288a, subd. (b)(2)),* 1 claims he has been denied equal protection of the law because his oral copulation conviction subjects him to mandatory registration as a sex offender under section 290. Had he instead had sexual intercourse with the victim, petitioner contends, he would have…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Lawrence v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund Ins. CompaniesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Hunter v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.