COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 72780
                                        ACCELERATED DOCKET
STATE OF OHIO
          Plaintiff-appellee
                                          JOURNAL ENTRY
     vs.
                                               AND
LACY HOOKS
                                             OPINION
          Defendant-appellant
                                           PER CURIAM
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
 OF DECISION:                    DECEMBER 18, 1997
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS:        Criminal appeal from
                                 Common Pleas Court
                                 Case No. CR-347464
JUDGMENT:                        Reversed.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:
APPEARANCES:
For plaintiff-appellee:          For defendant-appellant:
STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, ESQ.      HENRY F. DeBAGGIS, ESQ.
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor       55 Public Square
                                 Suite 2240
MELODY A. WHITE, ESQ.            Cleveland, Ohio  44113
The Justice Center
9th Floor
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio  44113
                               -2-
PER CURIAM:
     Defendant-appellant,  Lacy Hooks,  brings  this  accelerated
appeal from  the judgment  of  the trial  court ordering  him  to
register for a  period of ten years  beginning with the date  the
trial court found defendant to be a  sexually oriented offender.
     Defendant was indicted on February 13, 1997 with one count of
gross sexual imposition in violation of R.C. 2907.05.  On May 15,
1997, defendant entered a  no  contest  plea and the trial  court
found him guilty. Defendant was sentenced on June 11, 1997 to five
years of community control sanctions.  The court then conducted a
hearing pursuant to H.B. 180 to determine whether defendant had a
duty to register as a sex offender.  The court found defendant to
be a sexually oriented offender and ordered him to register for ten
years.
     Defendant filed an accelerated appeal, raising the following
sole assignment of error:
          THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY IMPOSING THE REGISTRATION
     REQUIREMENTS OF R.C. S 2950.03 AND S 2950.04 AFTER  THE
     DEFENDANT WAS SENTENCED TO COMMUNITY CONTROL SANCTIONS ON
     JUNE 11, 1997, AND DETERMINED TO BE A "SEXUALLY ORIENTED
     OFFENDER" BUT NOT A "HABITUAL SEX OFFENDER."
     In the  case at  bar defendant was  found to  be a  sexually
oriented  offender.   Revised  Code  2950.04,  which  defines  an
offender's duty to register, states in part as follows:
          (2) Regardless of when the sexually oriented offense
     was committed,  if  the  offender is  sentenced  for  a
     sexually oriented offense on or after the effective date
     of this section and if division (A)(1) of this  section
     does not  apply, within  seven days  of the  offender's
     coming into any county in which the offender resides or
                               -3-
     temporarily is domiciled for more than seven days,  the
     offender shall register with the sheriff of that county.
The effective  date of  this statute is  July 1,  1997.   Because
defendant was sentenced before the effective date of R.C. 2950.04,
the state  cannot require defendant to  register.  On appeal  the
state  agrees  that  the  trial  court  erred  by  imposing   the
registration requirement upon defendant.  Accordingly,  defendant's
sole assignment of error is sustained.  The trial court's judgment
requiring defendant  to  register  pursuant to  R.C.  2950.04  is
vacated.
     Judgment reversed.
                               -4-
     This cause is reversed.
     It is, therefore, ordered that appellant recover of appellee
its costs herein taxed.
     It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to
carry this judgment into execution.
     A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the  mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
                         JAMES D. SWEENEY, CHIEF JUSTICE
                         TERRENCE O'DONNELL, JUDGE
                         DIANE KARPINSKI, JUDGE
     N.B.  This entry is an announcement of the court's decision.
See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27.  This  decision
will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the
court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration
with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10)
days of the announcement of the court's decision.  The time period
for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the
journalization of  this court's announcement  of decision by  the
.