THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

In The Interest Of: S., Joshua,        Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County
Donna S. Strom, Family Court Judge

Unpublished� Opinion No. 2003-UP-367
Submitted March 26, 2003 - Filed May 21, 2003

AFFIRMED

Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, of Columbia; Warren Blair Giese, of Columbia; for Appellant

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson, Assistant Attorney General W. Rutledge Martin, of Columbia; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:� Joshua S. appeals from the order of the family court requiring him to cooperate with registration for the Sex Offender Registry.� We affirm.�

FACTUAL/PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

According to the petition in family court, on August 24, 2000, Joshua S. had sexual intercourse with the victim, who was thirteen years old at the time.� A child sexual assault examination protocol indicated that the victim had been assaulted.� In addition, the victim gave a written statement indicating Joshua S. had committed the act.� Joshua S. was sixteen years old at the time of the incident.�

The Solicitor�s Office remanded the case to family court.� Joshua S. pled guilty to criminal sexual conduct with a minor in the second degree.� Although he admitted that he had performed oral sex on the victim, he maintained that the conduct was consensual.� The Honorable Leslie K. Riddle ordered Joshua S. to be evaluated at the Midlands Evaluation Center.� At a subsequent hearing, Judge Riddle ordered that before a final disposition of the case, the Department of Mental Health should assess Joshua S. and treat him with medications as deemed appropriate and that he should have a sex offender risk assessment completed.�

The Honorable Donna S. Strom presided over the final hearing held June 19, 2001.� At the hearing, a friend of the victim stated that earlier on the day of the incident, the victim told her how she wanted to talk to Joshua S.� Joshua S. came over to the friend�s home.� He and the victim went into a bedroom and locked the door.� The friend looked under the door and saw their clothes on the floor.� When they came out of the room, they were both dressed.� The victim gave Joshua S. a hug at the door.� The friend stated she did not hear any screaming or any sort of disruption going on in the room.�

Judge Strom ordered Joshua S. to be committed to the South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice for an indeterminate period of time not to exceed his twenty-first birthday.� She also ordered him to cooperate with the Sex Offender Registry.� In doing so, she explained, �And If I was looking at this just as this isolated incident I would probably agree [not to have him register], but when I read this report there is more to this whole picture than just this one incident. . .�� She ordered him placed on the registry, �Because of this report as a whole, not because of this incident.��

DISCUSSION

South Carolina Code Ann. � 23-3-400 et seq. (Supp. 2002) creates a Sex Offender Registry of those convicted of or adjudicated delinquent of certain offenses.� Criminal sexual conduct with minors, second degree is one such offense.� S.C. Code Ann. � 23-3-430(3) (Supp. 2002).� This subsection provides two exceptions where a person convicted or adjudicated delinquent of second degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor is not an offender and is not required to register pursuant to the provisions of the statutes upon the court�s specific finding on the record that the conduct was consensual.�

The first exception is when �the conviction obtained for this offense resulted from consensual sexual conduct, as contained in Section 16-3-655(3) provided the offender is eighteen years of age or less.�� South Carolina Code Ann. � 16-3-655(3) (2003) provides:

A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree if the actor engages in sexual battery with a victim who is at least fourteen years of age but who is less than sixteen years of age and the actor is in a position of familial, custodial, or official authority to coerce the victim to submit or is older than the victim.

The second exception is where the conviction or adjudication was for �consensual sexual conduct between persons under sixteen years of age.� [1] � Id.

The first exception only applies if the victim is between the ages of fourteen and sixteen years old and the offender is eighteen years old or less.� The second exception applies only when both the victim and offender are under sixteen years old.� In the present case, the victim was thirteen years old and Joshua S. was sixteen years old at the time of the incident.� Thus, neither exception is applicable to this case.� A finding of whether the conduct was consensual was irrelevant to the issue of whether Joshua S. is required by law to register as a sex offender.� Accordingly, we find no error in the family court ordering Joshua S. to register as a sex offender.�

AFFIRMED.

CURETON, ANDERSON, and HUFF, JJ., concur.�