United States v. Coppock, No. 13-1189 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant entered a conditional guilty plea to a charge of failing to register and update his sex offender registration, and subsequently appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment. Defendant argued that Congress lacked authority under Article I of the Constitution to impose the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act's (SORNA), 42 U.S.C. 16911 et seq., registration requirement on him. The court concluded that Congress acted within its power in light of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in United States v. Comstock and United States v. Kebodeaux. The court's decision applies only to a sex offender who - at the time the registration requirement came into effect - was under federal parole supervision based on a conviction under federal law, and thus remained in a "special relationship with the federal government." The court rejected defendant's alternative contentions and affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. In light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Comstock, 560 U.S. 126 (2010) and United States v. Kebodeaux, 133 S. Ct. 2496 (2013), defendant's argument that his conviction under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2250(a) for failure to register as a sex offender is unconstitutional must be rejected; the decision here applies only to a sex offender who - at the time the registration requirements came into effect - was under federal parole supervision based upon a conviction under federal law, and thus remained in a "special relationship with the federal government."
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.