Plea Bargaining, Reliance, and Sex Offender Restrictions

Corey Yung

Corey Rayburn Yung is a Professor at the University of Kansas School of Law. His scholarship primarily focuses on sexual violence, substantive criminal law, and judicial decision-making. Yung’s academic writings have been cited by state and federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States. Before Yung began his professorial career, he served as an associate for Shearman & Sterling in New York and clerked for the Honorable Michael J. Melloy of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Eric Knight says:

    Thanks for a cognizant description, which really boils down to the fact that since the US Supreme Court ruled that public sex offender registries were constitutional because they didn’t impose a punitive component upon the registrant, that all laws emanating from such registry information, including the aforementioned SORNA, have essentially bastardized any rational, legal-based approach to recognizing compacts.

    In fact, as far as I know, the sex offender registry is the ONLY instrument that exists within American constitutional jurisdiction that heavily (and, I might add, “punitively”) criminalizes non-compliance with the “regulatory” sex offender registry. The warnings that were given in both the dissent, one of the concurrences, and even the overall concurrence language of Smith v. Doe have all been realized, and the registry at this point is not only beyond regulatory, but is extraordinarily, and by all rational measures, punitive to its intended targets to the point of hilarious acceptance.