Supreme Court of Alabama hears dispute over whether first-degree voyeurism counts as a '*** offense' for probation and registration

The Supreme Court of Alabama heard arguments in SC-2024-0771 on whether first-degree voyeurism falls within the statutory definition of a "*** offense," a classification that determines whether longer probation and registration requirements apply. State counsel Dylan Walden asked the court to reverse the Court of Criminal Appeals and reinstate an original eight-year probation term; defense counsel Zach Alstonbrook countered that the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly applied the law in light of how the statute read when the offense was committed.

The issue matters, attorneys told the court, because the statute that defines "*** offenses" contains multiple enumerations and catchall provisions that, depending on how they are read, either include or exclude conduct like voyeurism. Walden said the statute listed multiple ways a crime could qualify as a "*** offense," including provisions he argued encompass video voyeurism and conduct committed for "*** gratification," and that first-degree voyeurism therefore fit within several of the statute's definitions. He told the court, "all we're asking…