Ga. man sues to stay off Mo. sex offender registry

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. -- A man who is a registered sex offender in Georgia is seeking to avoid having to register himself when he moves to Missouri.

The man, using the pseudonym "John Doe," filed a lawsuit last week in Webster County against Sheriff Rob Worsham, the county prosecutor and the superintendent of the Missouri State Highway Patrol, saying he was convicted before Missouri's registry laws were on the books and he shouldn't have to abide by them.

The suit says the man pleaded guilty in 1993 in Georgia to two counts of child molestation, serving three years in prison and seven years of probation. He also had to register as a sex offender in Georgia.

Missouri's sex offender registry didn't go into effect until Jan. 1, 1995, so the man says the registry laws don't apply to him -- a stance the Missouri Supreme Court has supported in the past.

Jason Umbarger, the man's attorney, said his client has found a job in Missouri and is planning to move to Webster County. But he said the man doesn't want his face, address and past criminal record to be added to Internet sites that list the state's sex offenders.

Missouri's sex offender registry law says people convicted of qualifying sex crimes in other states as early as 1979 have to register when they move into the state, but the Supreme Court disagreed in a 2006 ruling.

The ruling doesn't differentiate between Missouri residents and those moving into the state, which is why Umbarger's client is going to court.

"The suit that we have filed merely seeks clarification of the statute," he said. "It's not an attempt to avoid the statute. He doesn't know what he's supposed to do."

Following the Supreme Court's ruling, the Missouri Highway Patrol stopped listing the addresses of 4,364 people whose most recent convictions of sex offenses came before 1995.

State senators have endorsed a constitutional amendment that would overturn that decision, allowing for the retroactive enforcement of the registry. If passed by both Houses, it could appear on the November ballot.

Besides seeking clarification on the Supreme Court decision, Umbarger said he's also claiming in the suit that the state's sex offender law doesn't differentiate between criminals who are still dangerous and those who are not.

"Many offenders required ... to register are not dangerous to others and have not been found to be dangerous sex offenders," the suit says. "Plaintiff is not dangerous to anyone."

Umbarger added that requiring his client to register would violate his rights to due process.

The attorney had planned to plead his client's case in Greene County and filed suit against Sheriff Jack Merritt and the state earlier this month. But he said he's moving to have the case dismissed after "John Doe" decided against moving to Greene County.

Merritt said he was glad the man had sought to get around the registry legally instead of simply ignoring it and not reporting to authorities.

"If he is a mandated registrant here, I would expect him to comply," Merritt said. "My suggestion for him would be to find a state where the statutes might conform to what he wants."