Commitment As Sexually Dangerous Person

Where the commonwealth filed a petition seeking the commitment of a defendant as a sexually dangerous person, the petition should have been granted for reasons stated in Commonwealth v. Bruno, 432 Mass. 489 (2000).

Having said this, we hold that a dismissal of the petition was improper and that a remand must be ordered.

Discussion

"The Superior Court judge, in his memorandum of decision on defendant's motion to dismiss, concluded that the Commonwealth had made a sufficient showing to support temporary commitment, basing this conclusion 'upon the nature and circumstances of the crime for which [the defendant] was committed, his failure to complete sex offender treatment, or to complete a relapse prevention plan, his institutional history, and .... the opinion of Katrin Rouse, a licensed clinical psychologist, designated forensic psychologist and qualified examiner, that [the defendant] suffers from a personality disorder and meets the statutory criteria for commitment and evaluation as a sexually dangerous person as that term is presently defined in G.L.c. 123A.' Notwithstanding this conclusion, which was supported by the documents before him, the Superior Court judge determined that G.L.c. 123A, Sect. 1, 'does not apply retroactively,' and therefore dismissed the petition.

"Commonwealth v. Bruno, 432 Mass. 489 (2000), was decided soon after oral argument in this case, and is determinative of the issues before us. The defendant was convicted in 1983 for aggravated rape and related offenses, for which he remained incarcerated until on or about August 11, 2000 ... when he was committed to the Massachusetts Treatment Center at Bridgewater, having met the statutory criteria for commitment and evaluation as a sexually dangerous person. As was the case in Bruno, 'Here, the conduct triggering the ... application [of G.L.c. 123A, Sects. 1, 12(b)] is not the prior conviction of a sexual offense, but the current mental condition of a defendant.' ...

"The Commonwealth's petition should not have been dismissed. The within matter is remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings consistent with this memorandum and order."

Commonwealth v. Jackson (Lawyers Weekly No. 81-002-01) (3 pages) (Appeals Court - Unpublished) (No. 2000-P-1322) (January 2, 2001).

Back to Sex Offender Court Cases and Decisions