Mandatory sex offender registration for Penal Code section 288, subdivision (a), does not violate the right to equal protection. Appellant was targeted in a sting operation after he made contact with a purported 12-year-old female on the internet and had sexually explicit discussions with her, with knowledge of the represented age. When he showed up at the house, he was arrested. Appellant was subsequently convicted of attempted lewd and lascivious conduct and, on appeal, argued that mandatory sex registration was a violation of his right to Equal Protection. [Pen. Code, sec. 290, the registration statute, is applicable to convictions for attempt to commit the specified offense.] The court rejected the claim, finding that section 288, subdivision (a), is an offense that is not substantially similar to those offenses for which registration is discretionary, i.e., sections 261.5 and 288a, subdivision (b)(1) and 289 (h). Section 288, subdivision (a), unlike the other compared offenses, involves victims under the age of 14 years, who because of their age are particularly vulnerable. Therefore, there is a legitimate state purpose in requiring mandatory registration.