This agreement was silent as to subsequent changes to the law. Was this an ex post facto violation? The latter court clarified their inquiry as: In short, John Doe is out of luck, and retroactive modification of the law won't violate the terms of a plea deal that is silent on the effect of statutory changes. Presumably, one could "lock in" present law by expressing such an intent in the written agreement. Wells as your Anchorage criminal defense attorney. Law enforcement agencies in certain jurisdictions will even engage in active notification by mailing out postcards or distributing fliers to warn people in the community when a registered sex offender moves to the area. John Doe, a registered sex offender, entered a plea deal providing for probation and registration under the terms of Penal Code Section as it existed in — a requirement to register for a private database only accessible by law enforcement officials. Even if you move to another city or state, the sex offender status will follow you, and failure to register will expose you to further criminal penalties. Sexual assault Sexual abuse of a minor Child kidnapping Online enticement of a minor Unlawful exploitation of a minor Indecent exposure Possession or distribution of child pornography A conviction for a sex crime could ruin your future. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit certified a question to the California Supreme Court seeking clarification of state law. The court held there that in contracts "infused with a substantial public interest Doe sued after the latter requirement was put into place and he was notified that his information would be available online.