State police, county differ on ruling's meaning for sex offenders

~ The conflict came to light after the arrest of a Cape Girardeau man on out-of-state warrants for failing to register.

State and local officials are at odds over the interpretation of a court ruling on sex offender registration following the arrest of a Cape Girardeau man last week.

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled in June that sex offenders convicted before Jan. 1, 1995, do not have to register in accordance with the Missouri sex offender registry. This is due to wording in the state constitution that prevents enforcement of such registration for those convicted before the registry law went into effect at the beginning of 1995.

Missouri is one of five states that has such language in its state constitution.

Up until recently, the ruling was thought to apply to all Missouri residents, including those who were convicted in another state before 1995 and later moved here.

But the Missouri State Highway Patrol has interpreted the Supreme Court's ruling differently, which could affect some of the 50 felons living in Cape Girardeau County who no longer have to register.

The patrol told the Cape Girardeau County Sheriff's Department that despite the court's ruling, Missouri honors the registration requirements of other states, county Lt. David James said.

If that interpretation holds true, out-of-state offenders convicted before 1995 would still have to register when they come to Missouri if required to do so in their former state, Prosecuting Attorney Morley Swingle said.

"That cures our problem for being a haven for them," Swingle said. The prosecutor had previously said more sex offenders would likely move into Missouri because they would not be required to register.

The conflict of interpretations came to light after Steven Dusterhoft, 26, of Cape Girardeau was arrested Wednesday by the sheriff's department.

He was arrested on a felony warrant out of Michigan for failure to comply with that state's sex offender registration law, James said.

In addition to the felony warrant, Dusterhoft had 44 misdemeanor warrants for failure to comply with reporting duties. Registered sex offenders are required to check in regularly with their local county sheriff's office.

Dusterhoft, whose crime involved a child younger than 13 years old, was being held without bond for the felony warrant when the sheriff's department was told the Michigan county that issued the warrants could not pay for his extradition out of Missouri, James said. Instead, Michigan officials made Dusterhoft promise to come back and turn himself in.

Because he violated no Missouri law, the sheriff's department couldn't hold Dusterhoft.

"We can't charge him," James said. "We have to turn him loose."

This week, Swingle will check with the highway patrol to find out where its interpretation of the court's ruling came from.

To err on the safe side and at the request of the highway patrol, James said, the sheriff's department made Dusterhoft fill out paperwork for sex offender registration.

Until a decision is made on the differing interpretations, Dusterhoft will remain off the sex offender Web site for the county, James said. If the patrol is wrong in its interpretation, he will not go on the Web site and will not have to follow registration requirements.

While the patrol's interpretation would eliminate the "haven," Swingle doubted it would hold based on his reading on the ruling.

"I think it's wishful thinking," he said.

A more likely cure could be found in changing the state's constitution.

In July, Sen. Jason Crowell said plans are in place to introduce legislation to remove the language in the state's constitution allowing the loophole. That legislation could come as early as January, he said.

kmorrison@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 127