34 U.S.C. § 20912
Registry requirements for jurisdictions
Each jurisdiction shall maintain a jurisdiction-wide sex offender registry conforming to the requirements of this subchapter.
The Attorney General shall issue guidelines and regulations to interpret and implement this subchapter.
This subchapter, referred to in text, was in the original “this title”, meaning title I of Pub. L. 109–248,
Section was formerly classified to section 16912 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases (15 in the last 5 years), 2017–2026 · leading case: United States v. Holcombe, 883 F.3d 12 (2d Cir. 2018).
United States v. Holcombe, 883 F.3d 12 (2d Cir. 2018). “Other SORNA provisions instruct jurisdictions to maintain sex offender registries that conform with the requirements of the Act, see 34 U.S.C. § 20912 , and to provide registry information to "each jurisdiction from or to which a change of residence, employment, or student…”
Wilkerson v. State, 533 S.W.3d 755 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017). “SORNA requires that every State “shall maintain a jurisdiction-wide sex offender registry conforming to the requirements of this subchapter,” 34 U.S.C. § 20912 (a), and “shall provide a criminal penalty that includes a maximum term of imprisonment that is greater than 1 year for…”
United States v. Jazzmin Dailey, 941 F.3d 1183 (9th Cir. 2019). “34 U.S.C. § 20912 . The guidelines call for use of the categorical approach when determining whether a crime is a “sex offense” under the residual clause: The [residual] clause covers “[a]ny conduct that by its nature is a sex offense against a minor.”
People v. Diaz, 32 N.Y.3d 538 (NY 2018). “The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, which superseded the JWA, continues to place compliance requirements on states subject to guidelines issued by the Attorney General ( see 34 USC § 20912 ). The New York State Legislature responded to the mandates of the JWA…”
The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent, IN the INTEREST OF T.B., Respondent/Cross-Petitioner, 489 P.3d 752 (Colo. 2021). “34 U.S.C. § 20912 (a) ( 2018 ) . But SORNA substantially expands the scope of information included on each registry to encompass a wide range of personal information about each registrant, including the registrant's name, address, license plate number and description of any…”
State v. Moler, 519 P.3d 794 (Kan. 2022). “38030 (July 2, 2008); see also 34 U.S.C. § 20912 (b) (2018) ("The Attorney General shall issue guidelines and regulations to interpret and implement this subchapter.”
United States v. Jason Kokinda, 93 F.4th 635 (4th Cir. 2024). “13 USCA4 Appeal: 22-4595 Doc: 64 Filed: 02/21/2024 Pg: 14 of 25 As authorized by SORNA, 34 U.S.C. § 20912 (b), the Attorney General has issued the SMART Guidelines for interpretation.”
United States v. Anthony Helton, 944 F.3d 198 (4th Cir. 2019). “34 U.S.C. § 20912 (b). Pursuant to this authority, the Attorney General promulgated the National Guidelines for Sex Offender Registration and Notification (“SMART Guidelines”), 73 Fed.”
United States v. Nicholas Edwards, 944 F.3d 631 (7th Cir. 2019). “See 34 U.S.C. § 20912 ; Minn. Stat. § 243.166 (6)(d)(1).”
People v. Edwards, 2025 NY Slip Op 04922 (N.Y. App. Div. 2025). “"The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, which superseded the JWA, continues to place compliance requirements on states subject to guidelines issued by the Attorney General" ( People v Diaz , 32 NY3d at 541; see 34 USC §§ 20912, 20927). III. The defendant's…”
United States v. Jason Kokinda (4th Cir. 2025). “34 U.S.C. § 20912 (b). Pursuant to that delegation of authority, the Attorney General issued the SMART Guidelines.”
United States v. Holcombe (2d Cir. 2018). “Other SORNA 4 provisions instruct jurisdictions to maintain sex offender registries that conform 5 with the requirements of the Act, see 34 U.S.C. § 20912 , and to provide registry 6 information to “each jurisdiction from or to which a change of residence, 7 employment, or…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.