In Doe v. Harris (2013) 57 Cal.4th 64, defendant pleaded no contest to an offense that subjected him to registration under section 290. At the time, the law provided that information concerning registered sex offenders was not available to the public. (Former 290, subd. (i).) The law subsequently changed with the 2004 enactment of "Megan's Law," which provided, among other things, that the names, addresses, and photographs of registered sex offenders would be public information. ( 290.46, added by Stats. 2004, ch. 745, 1, pp. 5798-5803.) The Legislature expressly made the law "applicable to every person described in this section, without regard to when his or her crimes were committed or his or her duty to register pursuant to Section 290 arose, and to every offense described in this section, regardless of when it was committed." ( 290.46, subd. (m).) Defendant filed a civil complaint, contending that applying the law as amended to him violated his plea agreement. (Harris, supra, 57 Cal.4th at pp. 66-67.) Defendant's case reached the Supreme Court, which framed the issue before it as follows: "whether the rule in California is that the terms of a plea agreement incorporate existing law to the exclusion of any retroactive amendments to the law . . . ." (Harris, supra, 57 Cal.4th at p. 69.) The court answered that question in the negative: "The general rule in California is that a plea agreement is '"deemed to incorporate and contemplate not only the existing law but the reserve power of the state to amend the law or enact additional laws for the public good and in pursuance of public policy. . . ."' It follows, also as a general rule, that requiring the parties' compliance with changes in the law made retroactive to them does not violate the terms of the plea agreement, nor does the failure of a plea agreement to reference the possibility the law might change translate into an implied promise the defendant will be unaffected by a change in the statutory consequences attending his or her conviction. To that extent, then, the terms of the plea agreement can be affected by changes in the law." (Id. at pp. 73-74.)