Published: 2012-03-13
Recent Sex Offender Case Raises Questions about CA Law
The recent settlement between the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and convicted sex offender Charles Small illustrates come of the problems Jessica’s Law has created regarding diagnosis and appropriate incarceration of sex offenders.
Charles Small is a sex offender who has been difficult to diagnose. His troubled past includes two arrests for indecent exposure, one incident of fondling a woman and a four-year conviction for molesting a nine-year-old girl, as well as marital problems and an addiction to alcohol. His varied past has complicated his present, due in part to Jessica’s Law, the California sex offender law enacted in 2007 that expands law enforcement’s ability to identify, track and arrest sex offenders.
Jessica’s Law requires that certain individuals residing in California who have been convicted of sex crimes live at least 2,000 feet from schools and parks and be monitored by GPS for life. It also requires that sex offenders who violate the conditions of their parole be arrested, evaluated for their degree of sexual violence and possibly returned to prison. Additionally, it increases penalties for violent predators and makes more offenders eligible for civil commitment to a mental health institution instead of parole.
The Case of Charles Small
Small’s encounter with Jessica’s Law occurred four years after he served his sentence for the molestation of a nine-year-old girl. Small was to be released from prison on February 5, 2007, after serving a six-month sentence for an alcohol-related parole violation. Under Jessica’s Law, Small was eligible for evaluation because he violated his parole. Since other state laws allow the CDCR to hold an inmate beyond his or her initial sentence if it has probable cause that the inmate is sexually violent, Small’s release date was extended to March 25th.
Five days before Small was to be released, the Department of Mental Health (DMH) began its evaluation and subjected Small to four rigorous mental health interviews over four days. Three of the four evaluators diagnosed Small with “paraphilia not otherwise specified,” a diagnosis used for those with varied sexual deviances. After reviewing the evaluators’ recommendations, the DMH determined that Small should be civilly committed.
On March 26th, the district attorney filed its petition to commit Small, but it was one day too late, since Small was scheduled to be released on the 25th and state law requires that the civil commitment process be conducted while the inmate is still in custody. The legal proceedings to determine whether or not the petition was valid took almost another year, and Small was held in prison until March 10th, 2008, when the Court of Appeals ruled that the petition was not valid since it was filed the day after Small was supposed to be released.
Wider Implications
Prior to Jessica’s Law, the DMH conducted an average of 50 referrals per month. After the law went into effect, this number jumped to over 720 in January 2007 alone. The district attorney tried to use this influx of cases as the reason for the delay in the petition, but district court and the court of appeals ruled that this was not a viable reason for keeping Small detained an extra 349 days. The CDCR settled with Small in 2011 for the time Small was unlawfully imprisoned.
Small’s case illustrates the problems Jessica’s Law poses for those accused and convicted of sexual offenses. It grants law enforcement a wide berth in identifying and arresting offenders and slaps harsh and lasting punishments on those convicted. Its far-reaching provisions lead to cases like Small’s, where a parole violation for possession of alcohol can lead to an extra year in prison and evaluation of sexual deviances for a crime that occurred almost half a decade earlier.
Jessica’s Law makes it all the more imperative that Californians accused of a sexual offense seek experienced counsel who understands the reach of the law. If you or a loved one has been accused of such a crime, please contact an experienced criminal defense attorney.
Charles Small is a sex offender who has been difficult to diagnose. His troubled past includes two arrests for indecent exposure, one incident of fondling a woman and a four-year conviction for molesting a nine-year-old girl, as well as marital problems and an addiction to alcohol. His varied past has complicated his present, due in part to Jessica’s Law, the California sex offender law enacted in 2007 that expands law enforcement’s ability to identify, track and arrest sex offenders.
Jessica’s Law requires that certain individuals residing in California who have been convicted of sex crimes live at least 2,000 feet from schools and parks and be monitored by GPS for life. It also requires that sex offenders who violate the conditions of their parole be arrested, evaluated for their degree of sexual violence and possibly returned to prison. Additionally, it increases penalties for violent predators and makes more offenders eligible for civil commitment to a mental health institution instead of parole.
The Case of Charles Small
Small’s encounter with Jessica’s Law occurred four years after he served his sentence for the molestation of a nine-year-old girl. Small was to be released from prison on February 5, 2007, after serving a six-month sentence for an alcohol-related parole violation. Under Jessica’s Law, Small was eligible for evaluation because he violated his parole. Since other state laws allow the CDCR to hold an inmate beyond his or her initial sentence if it has probable cause that the inmate is sexually violent, Small’s release date was extended to March 25th.
Five days before Small was to be released, the Department of Mental Health (DMH) began its evaluation and subjected Small to four rigorous mental health interviews over four days. Three of the four evaluators diagnosed Small with “paraphilia not otherwise specified,” a diagnosis used for those with varied sexual deviances. After reviewing the evaluators’ recommendations, the DMH determined that Small should be civilly committed.
On March 26th, the district attorney filed its petition to commit Small, but it was one day too late, since Small was scheduled to be released on the 25th and state law requires that the civil commitment process be conducted while the inmate is still in custody. The legal proceedings to determine whether or not the petition was valid took almost another year, and Small was held in prison until March 10th, 2008, when the Court of Appeals ruled that the petition was not valid since it was filed the day after Small was supposed to be released.
Wider Implications
Prior to Jessica’s Law, the DMH conducted an average of 50 referrals per month. After the law went into effect, this number jumped to over 720 in January 2007 alone. The district attorney tried to use this influx of cases as the reason for the delay in the petition, but district court and the court of appeals ruled that this was not a viable reason for keeping Small detained an extra 349 days. The CDCR settled with Small in 2011 for the time Small was unlawfully imprisoned.
Small’s case illustrates the problems Jessica’s Law poses for those accused and convicted of sexual offenses. It grants law enforcement a wide berth in identifying and arresting offenders and slaps harsh and lasting punishments on those convicted. Its far-reaching provisions lead to cases like Small’s, where a parole violation for possession of alcohol can lead to an extra year in prison and evaluation of sexual deviances for a crime that occurred almost half a decade earlier.
Jessica’s Law makes it all the more imperative that Californians accused of a sexual offense seek experienced counsel who understands the reach of the law. If you or a loved one has been accused of such a crime, please contact an experienced criminal defense attorney.
No comments:
Post a Comment