Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-1793-14T2
03-04-2015
IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL COMMITMENT OF D.A.C., SVP-16-99.
Patrick Madden, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant D.A.C. (Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney). Frank Ferrantelli, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General, attorney).
RECORD IMPOUNDED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Before Judges Fisher and Nugent. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Docket No. SVP-16-99. Patrick Madden, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant D.A.C. (Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney). Frank Ferrantelli, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General, attorney). PER CURIAM
D.A.C. appeals from a July 14, 2014 order, which continued his commitment to the Special Treatment Unit (STU) pursuant to the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA), N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.24 to -27.38. He argues that the trial judge gave undue weight to the opinions of the State's witnesses and, ultimately, that the State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that, if released, he is highly likely to commit acts of sexual violence. We find no merit in these arguments and affirm.
An individual, once convicted of a predicate offense as defined by the SVPA, may be subject to an involuntary civil commitment if suffering from "a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility for control, care and treatment." N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.26(b). Annual review hearings are required to determine whether the person remains in need of commitment despite treatment. N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.35; see also N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.32(a).
To warrant commitment, or continuation of the individual's prior commitment, the State must prove "the individual has serious difficulty in controlling sexually harmful behavior such that it is highly likely that he or she will not control his or her sexually violent behavior and will reoffend." In re Civil Commitment of W.Z., 173 N.J. 109, 132 (2002); see also In re Civil Commitment of J.M.B., 197 N.J. 563, 571, cert. denied, 558 U.S. 999, 130 S. Ct. 509, 175 L. Ed. 2d 361 (2009); In re Civil Commitment of G.G.N., 372 N.J. Super. 42, 46-47 (App. Div. 2004). The court must address the individual's "present serious difficulty with control over dangerous sexual behavior," and the State must establish "by clear and convincing evidence . . . that it is highly likely that the person . . . will reoffend." W.Z., supra, 173 N.J. at 132-34; see also In re Civil Commitment of J.H.M., 367 N.J. Super. 599, 611 (App. Div. 2003), certif. denied, 179 N.J. 312 (2004).
D.A.C. is fifty-six-years old and has been committed to the STU since 1999. The predicate offenses giving rise to his commitment have been discussed in earlier opinions and need not be repeated here. See In re Civil Commitment of D.A.C., No. A-3990-12 (App. Div. Dec. 3, 2013). At the hearing in question, the judge heard from only one witness — the State's expert — who testified he had diagnosed D.A.C. as suffering from pedophilic disorder, among other things. The expert testified that D.A.C. is at great risk for reoffending because of the confluence of this condition, D.A.C.'s substance abuse issues, and his refusal to participate "in any kind of treatment." Based on this undisputed testimony, the judge concluded that the State proved by clear and convincing evidence that D.A.C. was highly likely to reoffend.
The judge's findings and his expertise in these matters are entitled to our deference. In re Civil Commitment of R.F., 217 N.J. 152, 174-75 (2014).
Affirmed.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION