“John Doe,” a pseudonym, has appealed from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City dismissing his complaint for a declaratory judgment and related relief. At issue is whether Doe is required to register as a sexual offender pursuant to Maryland’s sexual offender registration law.
Appellees voice no objection to our vacating the circuit court’s judgment but urge us to instruct that court to dismiss the case as moot. Noting that “it is undisputed that [Doe] was not placed on the Maryland Sex Offender Registry, is not on the Registry, and that the Department has informed [Doe] that he is not obligated to register as a sex offender in Maryland,” appellees assert that there is “no justiciable issue before the Court.” We do not agree.
Certainly, the Department’s written assurance does not render the case moot.
There is currently a judgment requiring Doe to register as a sex offender—a judgment that, in light of Doe I and Doe II, is wrong. Doe has a
legitimate interest in seeing that judgment corrected.