Sharpnack, S.J.
We conclude that the analysis and holding in Wallace apply to this case. We are deciding whether the ex post facto provision of the Indiana Constitution prevents the application of Indiana’s SORA [sex offender registration act] to require Burton, a resident of Indiana, to register as a sex offender on the ground that he is required to register in Illinois as a consequence of having been convicted in Illinois of a sex offense prior to the enactment of both the statutes of Illinois and Indiana that required registration. Had the qualifying offense and the enactment of the registration requirement occurred in Indiana, Wallace would dictate dismissal of the charges. We hold that Burton has the protection of our constitution as to the application of our SORA, without regard to the fact that he was convicted of the qualifying sex offense in Illinois. It is for us, not Illinois, to determine who is required to register under our SORA.
MAY, J., and BARNES, J., concur.