In Re: Timothy Porter.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY IN RE: TIMOTHY PORTER ) ) ) ) C. A. No. 05M-05-039-FSS Submitted: July 22, 2005 Decided: October 19, 2005 ORDER Upon Defendant s Petition for Redesignation of Sex Offender Risk Assessment Tier - - DENIED On May 12, 2005, Mr. Porter filed his Petition for Redesignation of Sex Offender Risk Assessment Tier. Porter had been convicted in New York and a risk assessment was made there. When Porter returned to Delaware, he was assigned to a higher tier, consistent with Delaware s risk assessment statute. Porter claims that New York s law applies. The court heard argument on June 27, 2005 and it required the State to file a response within ten days. The State asked for and received an additional week, which meant that its response was due on July 14, 2005. The State filed its submission on July 22, 2005. It appears that in February 2003, Porter committed acts in New York, using the internet, amounting to sexual solicitation of a child. 1 Porter was prosecuted and convicted in New York. As required by New York s law, Porter was evaluated and after 1 New York Penal Laws sections 110/235. 22; 11 Del. C. ยง 1112A. a hearing, he was assigned to Sex Offender Registration Level 1, New York s lowest designation. Although Porter was convicted in New York, he is a Delaware resident and he intends to continue living here. Accordingly, having been convicted of a predicate offense, he is required under Delaware law to register as a sex offender and he must be assigned to a tier level. In contrast to New York law, Delaware s assignment of sex offenders to risk assessment tiers is offense-based and automatic.2 In other words, the New York conviction and Porter s decision to live here trigger Delaware s registration law. And under Delaware law, Porter must be assigned to a higher tier, regardless of New York s risk assessment. New York s assessment is appropriate for someone living in New York. Delaware s statute, however, reflects this community s registration needs. Common sense dictates that New York should not control the way sex-offenders living in Delaware should be assessed. The court is satisfied that Porter s tier level assignment in Delaware is triggered and controlled by Delaware s law, not New York s. Therefore, the Petition for Re-designation is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge oc: Prothonotary pc: Stuart Sklut, Deputy Attorney General 2 Helman v. State, 784 A.2d 1058, 1065-68 (Del. 2001). Natalie Woloshin, Esquire Stuart Sklut, Esquire Department of Justice Carvel State Office Building 820 N. French Street, 7 th Fl. Wilmington, DE 19801 Natalie Woloshin, Esquire Woloshin Lynch Natalie & Gagne 3200 Concord Pike P.O. Box 7329 Wilmington, DE 19803
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
