{"id":2450,"date":"2021-02-25T13:20:02","date_gmt":"2021-02-25T19:20:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?p=2450"},"modified":"2021-03-03T13:26:01","modified_gmt":"2021-03-03T19:26:01","slug":"commonwealth-v-daughtery-ky-2021","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2021\/02\/25\/commonwealth-v-daughtery-ky-2021\/","title":{"rendered":"Commonwealth v. Daughtery (Ky. 2021)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Commonwealth v. Daughtery, No. 2019-SC-0201-DG (Ky. 2021)<\/h2>\n

Nature of Case: <\/strong><\/strong> Appellant was convicted of three counts of distribution of illegal images in Kentucky state court, though the trial court did not require him to register as a sex offender as it held that it was not a sex offense under state law. The Commonwealth appealed that finding, which the Court of Appeals held was incorrect, but nevertheless affirmed the judgment finding that because the offenses arose from a single course of conduct, lifetime registration was not required. The Commonwealth sought review from the Kentucky Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

Holding: <\/strong> Kentucky Supreme Court held that, under the state’s statutory scheme for registration, the Appellant had committed an offense against a minor which required registration and lifetime registration was required.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Case Documents<\/em><\/h2>\n