USA v. John Dietrich, No. 09-30138 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 19 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 09-30138 D.C. No. 6:08-CR-00009-CCL v. MEMORANDUM* JOHN JAY DIETRICH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Charles C. Lovell, Senior District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted October 6, 2010 Seattle, Washington Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, and THOMAS and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. The Supreme Court has held that 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a) does not apply to sex offenders whose interstate travel occurred prior to SORNA s effective date. United States v. Begay, 622 F.3d 1187, 1195 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Carr v. United States, --- U.S. ----, 130 S. Ct. 2229, 2232 33 (2010)). In United States v. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Valverde, --- F.3d ----, 2010 WL 5263142, at *8 (9th Cir. Dec. 27, 2010), we held that, for persons like Dietrich who were convicted of sex offenses prior to the statute s enactment, SORNA s registration requirements became effective on August 1, 2008. This date is thirty days after the Attorney General published guidelines that accorded with the APA s requirements and announced SORNA s retroactive applicability. Id.; see 5 U.S.C. § 553; Office of the Attorney General, The National Guidelines for Sex Offender Registration and Notification, 73 Fed. Reg. 38,030, 38,046 47 (July 2, 2008); see also United States v. Utesch, 596 F.3d 302, 311 (6th Cir. 2010). Dietrich s interstate movement as an unregistered sex offender concluded in April 2008, several months before SORNA s registration requirements applied to him. We therefore reverse his conviction. Carr, 130 S. Ct. at 2233. REVERSED AND REMANDED. -2-

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.