United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
States Magistrate Judge David R. Grand
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS [11 AND GRANTING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
GERSHWIN A. DRAIN United States District Judge
21, 2016, state parolee Paul Anthony Hall
("Petitioner") applied for the writ of habeas
corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254. Dkt. No. 1. Petitioner
committed criminal sexual conduct as a teenager. Years later,
he was convicted of second-degree fleeing and eluding a
police officer. Pursuant to Michigan Compiled Laws §
28.723(1)(e), Hall's sentence for the latter offense
required that he register as a sex offender, given his
juvenile conviction for criminal sexual conduct. In
requesting habeas relief, Hall argues his forced registration
as a sex offender is cruel and unusual punishment.
See Dkt. No. 1, p. 2 (Pg. ID 2).
State maintains, and the Court agrees, that the state
courts' rejection of Petitioner's claim was not
contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, Supreme Court
precedent. Accordingly, the Court will DENY the habeas
1987, when Hall was fifteen years old, he committed
third-degree criminal sexual conduct. Decades later, in 2012,
while on parole from three felony drug convictions,
Petitioner fled from two Michigan state troopers during a
traffic stop. On July 22, 2013, Petitioner pleaded guilty in
Oakland County Circuit Court to second-degree fleeing and
eluding a police officer. See Mich. Comp. Laws
§ 75O.479a(4). There was no plea agreement, but the
trial court agreed to sentence Hall within the sentencing
guidelines, as calculated at the time of his
sentencing. 7/22/13 PleaTr., pp. 7, 13 (Dkt. No. 5-4,
Pg. ID 114, 120).
sentencing, Petitioner moved to withdraw his guilty plea.
Hall contended that at the time of his plea neither the
prosecutor, nor defense counsel knew of his prior
adjudication for criminal sexual conduct or that he would
have to register as a sex offender. The trial court denied
Hall's motion after concluding he had not established a
basis for setting aside the plea. 10/2/13 Mot. Hr'g, pp.
3-4 (Dkt. No. 5-5, Pg. ID 128-29).
October 8, 2013, the trial court sentenced Hall as a habitual
offender to imprisonment for nineteen months to ten years,
and ordered him to comply with sex-offender registration
requirements. 10/8/13 Sentencing Tr., pp. 6-7 (Dkt. No. 5-6,
Pg. ID 137-38); 10/8/13 Judgment of Sentence, p. 1 (Dkt. No.
5-8, Pg. ID 189).
subsequently moved to correct the sentence. He asked the
trial court to strike from his judgment of sentence and
pre-sentence report any reference to the sex-offender
registry. He claimed the registration requirement constituted
cruel and unusual punishment because it was mandatory and did
not consider specific characteristics. Hall noted he was a
juvenile when he committed the criminal sexual conduct
offense, and maintained that he had been rehabilitated.
Petitioner also asked the trial court to correct his
pre-sentence report to show that he had only one juvenile
delinquency adjudication for criminal sexual conduct. 6/4/14
Mot. Hr'g, pp. 3-11 (Dkt. No. 5-7, Pg. ID 143-51).
trial court granted in part and denied in part
Petitioner's motion. The court agreed to correct the
pre-sentence report to show that Hall had only one juvenile
disposition for criminal sexual conduct. But the court
declined to remove the sex-offender registration requirement
from the pre-sentence report and judgment of sentence. The
court reasoned the sex-offender registration requirement was
not cruel and unusual punishment, particularly in light of
Hall's five or six convictions after the juvenile
adjudication Id. at pp. 13-16, Pg. ID 153-56;
People v. Hall, No. 13-244395-FH (Oakland Cty. Cir.
Ct. June 4, 2014).
appeal, Hall argued that forcing him to register as a sex
offender after a conviction for second-degree fleeing and
eluding a police officer was cruel and unusual punishment
under the state and federal constitutions. The Michigan Court
of Appeals denied him leave to appeal, and later denied his
motion for reconsideration. People v. Hall, No.
322400 (Mich. Ct. App. Aug. 26, 2014). Hall presented the
same claim to the Michigan Supreme Court, which also denied
leave to appeal. See People v. Hall, 497 Mich. 983,
861 N.W.2d 39 (2015).
21, 2016, Petitioner filed his habeas corpus petition through
counsel. He argues here-as in the state courts-that requiring
him to register as a sex offender constitutes cruel and
unusual punishment under the state and federal constitutions.
He asks the Court to strike the reference to the sex-offender
registry from his judgment of sentence and pre-sentence
report, and to order the State to remove his name from the
Standard of Review
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), as amended by the
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
("AEDPA"), the Court can grant a state
prisoner's application for the writ of habeas corpus only
if the state ...