Collins’s conviction expunged, but will still have to comply with sex offender registry

A Minocqua man convicted in Oneida County Court of child-related crimes and avoided jail time will also have his conviction expunged as long as he successfully completes his sentence, but he will still have to comply with the state’s Sex Offender Registry Program.

Jacob Collins, 23, 7339 Deerwood Road in Minocqua, pled guilty to one felony count of exposing a child to harmful material and four misdemeanor counts of possessing harmful material-child exposure on May 12, 2025. 

He was originally charged with two felonies after a tip to local law enforcement from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children led to an investigation that allegedly showed Collins in possession of approximately 47 photos and 423 videos depicting children engaged in sexually explicit content. 

On Sept. 5, 2025, Collins was sentenced by Marathon County judge Gregory Strasser to serve concurrently three years of probation for the misdemeanor counts and three years probation for the felony count, with conditions including a mental health evaluation, no access to internet without permission from his probation officer and no contact with anyone under the age of 18 without permission from his probation officer.

Strasser also ordered Collins to register as a sex offender, which, according to the state’s sex offender registry, has an end date of May 12, 2040. 

Collins’s attorney Joel Hirschhorn filed a motion in court for expungement and exemption of the state Sex Offender Registry Program and a brief to support that on Oct. 10, 2025. 

Strasser issued a decision and order on the matter Nov. 21, 2025. 

The state, Strasser wrote in his decision and order, agrees Collins is statutorily eligible for expungement under state law, however, feels expungement shouldn’t be granted. 

“The State specifically asserts that important objectives of criminal sentencing (protection of the community, punishment of the defendant, rehabilitation of the defendant and deterrence) require denial of expungement,” Strasser wrote. “In this respect, the State notes that a record of a conviction serves to deter both the general public and the individual offender by bringing awareness to the type of conduct that is prohibited by law. In other words, a public record of a conviction involving the conduct at issue deters that conduct by sending a message concerning accountability. 

“The State also argues that the Defendant's convictions create an important public perception that those convicted of child sex offenses are often publicly chastised resulting in a deterrent effect (i.e. individuals fear how the public will perceive them upon learning of a conviction that would be of public record).”

Strasser quoted the state’s response to the request for expungement and exemption. 

“Thus, expungement in this case ultimately harms society because it undermines at least one of the sentencing objectives — deterrence,” the state is quoted in Strasser’s decision and order. “Additionally, the defendant has already received significant leniency in this case and to allow the defendant to expunge his public record would be allowing the defendant to have his cake and eat it too.”

The state, according to the decision and order by Strasser, said expunging Collins’s record would “unduly depreciate the gravity of this offense,” because Collins “avoided being convicted of a Class C Felony and also avoided having to serve a mandatory three years in the Wisconsin Prison System.”

Strasser explained Hirschhorn’s argument for expungement and exemption next.

“The Defendant argues that the factors that were the subject of analysis at sentencing show that he is not a danger to society and that we would greatly benefit from expungement,” Strasser wrote. 

“He points out that he has no prior criminal convictions and he was not convicted of a violent offense. He further asserts that it was shown at sentencing that he is not likely to harm society again as he is a very low risk for reoffending, based on Dr. Benson’s testimony. He also points to the expert testimony showing that his behavior was partially attributable to psychological abnormalities that can be effectively addressed through psychotherapy and that he is a very good candidate for rehabilitation and probation.”

Strasser said, like he did during the sentencing hearing on Sept. 5, 2025, it’s important to keep people from viewing or sharing the type of child pornography Collins was alleged to be in possession of.

“However, the court also believes that the Defendant is very unlikely to cause any additional harm to society,” Strasser wrote. “Once ‘caught’ the Defendant was cooperative with all who asked him about his actions and did not demonstrate any tendency to deflect, deny or make excuses for his behavior. This case represents the sum total of his offense against society, to date. The Defendant’s actions are likely the result of a psychological issue of great weight, which has been identified and is being treated. For this reason, there is very little indication that expungement will make society more vulnerable to future criminal activity by the Defendant.” 

Collins’s actions have already led to "significant consequences,” Strasser said, “both in terms of the criminal justice system and personally and publicly.” 

“It can hardly be said that his case represents a ‘slap on the wrist’ to him,” Strasser wrote. “Then too, expungement is not a ‘get out of jail free’ card. It is an acknowledgement that the person who committed the offense was young and is otherwise worthy of a path forward, away from his offense. It is not forgiveness, but it is a statement that society will be better served by the court finding that the Defendant has the ability to address his condition and move forward with a meaningful and productive life. Both the Defendant and society will benefit from recognizing that ability.”

Strasser also pointed out expungement doesn’t mean Collin’s conviction is erased, but rather, “removes the public court record of a conviction.”

With regard to Collins being exempt from the sex offender registry, Strasser said the defendant will still have to comply with the sex offender registry, given state law. 

“The court concludes that the statutory language it is to apply is not ambiguous,” Strasser wrote. “That language plainly applies the SORP [Sex Offender Registry Program] to the offense at issue. The statute prescribes the limited instances where the court is allowed to exercise discretion, relative to SORP exemption. This case does not fall within the parameters of those limited instances. As such, consistent with the State’s argument, the court concludes that it does not possess the legal ability to exercise the discretion argued by the Defendant, and the SORP requirement therefore applies to the Defendant.

“Based upon the above decision, the court hereby orders that the Defendant's motion that his convictions be expunged upon successful completion of his sentences, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.015, is granted but that his motion requesting that the court find that he is not required to comply with SORP is denied, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 973.048(2m).”

Trevor Greene may be reached via email at [email protected].