Missouri's Sexual Predator Law Unconstitutional, Inmate Says

---

1-13-17 Missouri

An attorney for a man who served a 25-year prison sentence for rape argued Thursday that a Missouri law allowing him to be subsequently committed indefinitely to a mental institution as a "sexually violent predator" is unconstitutional.

The Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments from attorneys for Jay Nelson and the state about its sexually violent predator statute.

The law says that if prisoners have a "mental abnormality" making them act out in a sexually violent way, then they should be evaluated before they leave prison.

If a team of Department of Corrections and Department of Mental Health experts determine the prisoners still are dangerous, a judge can commit the offenders to a secure mental health facility following the completion of their criminal sentences.

Missouri sexually violent predators, their lawyers, stuck on how to move forward in legal dispute

---

10-21-16 Missouri:

ST. LOUIS • A class of sexually violent predators and their attorneys had reason to celebrate in September 2015. After a six-year fight, they convinced a federal judge here that their treatment at a controversial Missouri Department of Mental Health program was a sham because nobody was being released.

But now they are wrestling with a new obstacle: How to best improve treatment at Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS, which has secure facilities in Fulton and Farmington.

SORTS patients have already served prison sentences for heinous crimes; they are held indefinitely in anticipation of what they might do.

In a twist of events in the case, alliances between patients and attorneys have split over suggested changes to SORTS treatment and guidelines.

As courts censure civil detention practices, is it time for professionals to speak up?

---

9-15-15 Missouri:

Guest commentary by David S. Prescott, LICSW*

Last week, a federal judge ruled that Missouri's civil commitment program is unconstitutional, the second such court decision in three months. For readers unfamiliar with the US civil commitment laws (AKA “SVP” laws), the short version is that 20 states and the federal government have laws that allow states to indefinitely confine sex offenders who are assessed as having a mental diagnosis that predisposes them to commit future sexual violence. There are controversies at every possible turn in these laws, their processes, and subsequent programs, and the US Supreme Court decisions allowing civil commitment have passed by as little as one vote. Because the author was an expert witness in the Missouri case, this essay looks more at the big-picture issues rather than at that specific case. What seems clear is that there is an evolving consensus in the courts that civil commitment as it is being practiced in many places is unconstitutional and that governments and programs must work together closely to rein in widespread abuses.

Civil Commitment: Another program is found unconstitutional

---

9-14-15 Missouri:

On Friday, September 11, 2015, the Missouri civil commitment program (known as SORTS) was declared unconstitutional, the second such instance since the start of this summer. For readers unfamiliar with the US civil commitment laws (AKA “SVP” laws), the short version is that 20 states and the federal government have laws that allow states to indefinitely confine sex offenders who are assessed as having a mental diagnosis that predisposes them to acts of sexual violence and meet statutory criteria of risk for future re-offense.

There are controversies at every possible turn in these laws, their processes, and subsequent programs, and the US Supreme Court rulings allowing civil commitment have passed by as little as one vote. Because the author was an expert witness in the Missouri case, this blog post looks more at the big-picture issues rather than at that specific case. What seems clear is that there is an evolving consensus in the courts that civil commitment as it is practiced in many areas is unconstitutional and that governments and programs must work together closely to keep it lawful.

No Exit for Sex Offenders in Missouri

---

9-14-15 Missouri:

ST. LOUIS (CN) - A Missouri "rehabilitation" program commits sexually violent predators to a center where they are "warehoused without treatment" indefinitely, due to the state's "systemic failures," a federal judge ruled.

Missouri's Sexually Violent Predators Act of 1999 created the Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment facilities, or SORTS, to which about 200 people have been civilly committed in the belief they might reoffend.

SORTS residents had already completed prison sentences for their crimes.

In 2009, SORTS residents filed a class action claiming the SVP Act is unconstitutional because it violates the Due Process clause. The class pointed out that no offender had ever been released from SORTS in the program's 16-year history.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Audrey Fleissig ruled that the SVP Act is constitutional, but not in how it is applied.

US judge rules handling of state's sexual predator program is unconstituional

---

9-11-15 Missouri:

ST. LOUIS • In an awaited ruling from the federal bench, U.S. District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig ruled late Friday afternoon that Missouri’s sexually violent predator law is constitutional, but not how it’s applied.

The judge wrote that there is a “pervasive sense of hopelessness” at the Department of Mental Health’s Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS program, because patients aren’t being properly released.

With help from the state attorney general’s office, SORTS is indefinitely committing about 200 people to treatment on the belief that they might reoffend. The program has been praised and criticized since it began in 1999.

Before the trial started in April, nobody had completed treatment and been allowed to live outside of secure SORTS facilities in Fulton or Farmington. They entered the program after completing prison sentences for sex crimes.

“The overwhelming evidence at trial — much of which came from Defendants’ own experts — did establish that the SORTS civil commitment program suffers from systemic failures regarding risk assessment and release that have resulted in the continued confinement of individuals who no longer meet the criteria for commitment, in violation of the Due Process Clause,” Fleissig wrote in her ruling.

Treatment or punishment? Judge to decide fate of sex offender program

---

4-30-15 Missouri:

ST. LOUIS • Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon once stood in front of a controversial treatment facility for sexually violent predators and praised it for making sure there were no more victims.

The governor, a Democrat, said the Department of Mental Health program — which is indefinitely committing about 200 people to treatment on the belief that they might reoffend — is legally sound. Judges weigh annual reports to determine when patients deserve to be released. And the Legislature, now Republican-controlled, adds a layer of oversight, scrutinizing the program’s budget.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys in a class action lawsuit that’s been in the works since 2009 attempted to punch holes into these positions and others during an eight-day federal bench trial that ended here Thursday.

Class action lawsuit begins over Missouri's treatment of sexually violent predators

---

4-21-15 Missouri:

ST. LOUIS • A trial started here Tuesday in U.S. District Court that will determine if the treatment at a controversial Missouri Department of Mental Health program for sexually violent predators is constitutional.

Seeds for the case were planted in 2009, when a handful of men — civilly committed against their will to the maximum security Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS, facility in Farmington — wrote out legal claims by hand. They were being billed by the state for care and treatment that they didn’t want to be a part of at SORTS.

The Eastern District of Missouri eventually assigned the case to a lead litigator at the Clayton-based law firm Armstrong Teasdale, who, over time, broadened the case to a class action lawsuit that alleges SORTS is a prison disguised as a mental health hospital. The firm says it has since put “millions” of dollars worth of time into the case.

With the help of the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri and others, plaintiffs’ attorneys sought and sifted through about 1 million pages of internal emails, memos and other documents associated with the SORTS program.

“This is an important case,” plaintiffs’ attorney Jack Quinn said during opening statements. “It’s an important day.”

Following the lead of other states, the Missouri law seeks to identify sexual predators nearing the end of their prison sentences. It then lays out a process for civil courts to decide if they need to be locked up further, but in treatment. The statute sets no time limit on confinement, saying the treatment should continue until the risk falls to acceptable levels.

Van Orden v Schafer: Costs of Civil Commitment

---

3-28-2015 Missouri:

This matter is before the Court on the motion (Doc. No. 351) for partial summary judgment filed by Defendants Keith Schafer, Rick Gowdy, Joseph Parks, Robert Reitz, Melissa Ring, Julie Inman, Linda Moll, Harold Meyers, Judy Sumpter, Daman Longworth, Alan Blake, Jay Englehart, Mark Stringer, Donna Augustine, Dave Schmitt, Justin Arnett, Marty Martin-Forman, Ian Fluger, Sherry Lee, Ericka L. Kempker, and Kristina Bender-Crice (collectively, "Defendants").

Plaintiffs in this class action are civilly committed residents of Missouri's Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services ("SORTS") facilities. They assert claims against Defendants in their official capacities as current or former employees of the Missouri Department of Mental Health ("DMH").

Plaintiffs challenge the care and treatment they received at SORTS and the reimbursement sought for that treatment. Defendants seek summary judgment solely on Plaintiffs' claims regarding reimbursement.

For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' motion shall be granted in part and denied in part.

... ... ...

This class action raises claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., challenging

• (1) the care and treatment, or lack thereof, provided to individuals civilly committed to SORTS after being declared sexually violent predators ("SVPs") under Missouri's SVP statute, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 632.480 et seq.; and
• (2) Missouri's statutory scheme requiring reimbursement from SORTS residents, or their families or estates, for the cost of their allegedly inadequate care and treatment, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 630.205-630.220; 473.398-473.399.

Defendants seek summary judgment solely on the latter claims, regarding reimbursement.

Plaintiffs challenge the reimbursement scheme on substantive due process and equal protection grounds. They seek to have the reimbursement statutes declared unconstitutional as applied, to enjoin Defendants from seeking reimbursement from Plaintiffs, and to have any property seized by Defendants under the reimbursement statutes returned to Plaintiffs or their estates. ...Continued...

---

Judge issues separate Order as to certain evidence:

---

This matter (same action as above) is before the Court on Defendants' motion (Doc. No. 382) to exclude the reports and testimony of Plaintiffs' expert witnesses, David Prescott and Brian Abbott, from the bench trial in this case. For the reasons set forth below, the motion shall be granted in part and denied in part.

... ... ...

Conclusion:
For the reasons set forth above,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to exclude the testimony and reports of David Prescott and Brian Abbott is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. (Doc. No. 382.)

The motion is GRANTED with respect to Abbott's opinions that the SVP civil commitment process is flawed public policy and biased in favor of commitment. The motion is DENIED in all other respects. ...Continued...

---

Geitz v Koster

---

3-4-15 Missouri:

Geitz v Koster

Plaintiffs, who are pretrial civil detainees moving to proceed in forma pauperis, bring this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of their constitutional rights. Upon review of the complaint, the Court finds that defendants should be served with process.

Plaintiffs James Geitz, Roger Blum, and Kenneth Christner are currently detained at the Ste. Genevieve Detention Center pursuant to Missouri's Sexually Violent Predator Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 632.480-632.513 (the "Act")

Named as defendants are Chris Kostner, Attorney General for the State of Missouri; George Lombardi, Director of the Missouri Department of Corrections; Ellis McSwain, Jr., Chairman of the Board of Probation and Parole; Julie Motley, Director of the Missouri Sex Offender Program; Keith Schafer, Director of the Missouri Department of Mental Health; and David Schmitt, Director of the Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services ("SORTS").

Plaintiffs allege that their rights to equal protection and to be free from cruel and unusual punishment have been infringed upon by an "unwritten policy" of the defendants. Plaintiffs were all imprisoned for sex-related crimes. During their incarceration, they participated in Missouri's Sex Offender Treatment Program (the "Program"). In the Program, prisoners are encouraged to prepare a Sexual Victim Disclosure packet. They are instructed to write down not only the victims for the crimes giving rise to their incarceration, but also victims for whom they had not been prosecuted.

Missouri sexually violent predator trials to be put on hold for class action lawsuit

---

Oddball post, read last few paragraphs.

10-7-2014 Missouri:

The Missouri attorney general’s office has agreed to take a limited break from civil trials that seek to indefinitely commit sexually violent predators to secure treatment facilities run by the Missouri Department of Mental Health.

Sexually violent predators are held at Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS, in Farmington and Fulton after completing lengthy prison sentences. Law enforcement officials try to commit about 20 men each year to the controversial program through civil commitment trials.

According to a stipulation filed Thursday in federal court, the attorney general’s office agreed not to set civil commitment cases for trial between Dec. 1 and May 1. The decision clears the deck for a large federal lawsuit against Missouri that alleges SORTS is unconstitutional. An April 21 trial date was recently set for the federal case, an attorney said.

“There is a fundamental constitutional issue that has to be resolved, and until that is resolved the process should be stopped,” said Eric Selig, lead attorney representing about 200 sex offenders who are plaintiffs in the class-action suit. “The AG’s office was pretty reasonable to agree with us to put everything on hold.”

The break is expected to affect seven civil commitment trials. Six separate cases set for trial before Dec. 1 will go forward.

Lawsuit targets Missouri sex offender treatment

---

2-12-2014 Missouri:

New filings in a class action lawsuit challenging Missouri's treatment of convicted sex offenders seek the release from custody of more than 200 men in the program.

New filings in a class action lawsuit challenging Missouri's treatment of convicted sex offenders seek the release from custody of more than 200 men in the program.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that the legal challenge to the Missouri Department of Mental Health claims its Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services program is mismanaged, overcrowded and essentially a prison disguised as a mental hospital.

The program was created to treat sex offenders who complete prison sentences but are deemed unsafe to be released. They are held indefinitely as mental health patients at secure facilities in Farmington and Fulton

Since the program was started 14 years ago, no one has successfully completed treatment. The suit was first filed in 2009. Missouri is among 20 states with similar treatment programs. ..Source.. by Roller Daily News.com

---

Lawsuit claims Missouri's program for sexually violent predators should be shut down

---

2-7-2014 Missouri:

New filings in a class action lawsuit call on 200 rapists and pedophiles to be released, claiming the Missouri Department of Mental Health program that is supposed to treat them is “government at its worst.”

Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS, was created to work with sex offenders after they complete prison sentences. Civil courts determined the men were too likely to reoffend because of a “mental abnormality.” Now as mental health patients, they are held indefinitely in secure facilities in Farmington and Fulton until their risk falls to acceptable levels.

Since the program started in 1999, nobody has completed treatment. The lawsuit alleges the $25 million program is mismanaged, underfunded, overcrowded and is essentially a prison disguised as a mental hospital.

The lawsuit, originally filed in 2009, claims problems with SORTS “arose out of the belief that the imprisonment of those branded as sexually violent predators were so reviled that no one would notice nor care when tucked away.”

The Post-Dispatch recently reported on internal state emails and memos that suggest that even administrators and employees of the program worried about its validity. In 2009, Missouri Department of Mental Health director Keith Schafer wrote that SORTS would be a “sham” if nobody completed treatment and was released. A former chief of operations wrote that the program was a “disaster waiting to happen.”

Those notes and others were included in Thursday’s court filing.

Department of Mental Health spokeswoman Debra Walker said department officials hadn’t received notice of the new filing. She said the issue was “a matter for the courts.” The Missouri attorney general’s office, which litigates the civil commitment cases, also declined to comment.

Missouri is one of 20 states that has civil commitment laws for sexually violent predators. Many of the programs started in the 1990s after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Kansas’ law. Other states have fared much better than Missouri in showing that patients can progress through the program, according to the lawsuit.

By February 2005, Wisconsin granted 46 conditional releases and 20 final discharges; Illinois granted 18 and 1, respectively.

Critics target Missouri sex offender treatment

---

1-17-2014 Missouri:

A Missouri sex crimes treatment program that has yet to release any offenders faces growing criticism from civil rights lawyers and patients who say being ordered to indefinitely participate in the mental health effort is little different than receiving a second prison sentence for the same crime.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch (bit.ly/1avjv6w ) reported Friday that nearly 200 sexually violent predators participate in the Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services program, which began in 1999. None have successfully completed treatment in a program that costs the state $25 million annually, or more than $300 a day per patient. About 20 names are added to the patient list annually.

The newspaper obtained program records from a class-action civil rights lawsuit that seeks to improve treatment so the patients have a reasonable chance of being released. The records include a 2009 email from a state agency department head who spoke about the program's potential shortcomings in blunt terms.

"No one has ever graduated from (SORTS) and somewhere down the line, we have to do that or our treatment processes become a sham," wrote Keith Schafer, the leader of the state Department of Mental Health.

In a prepared statement, current Missouri Department of Mental Health Officials said the program meets nationally accepted standards for hospital care and is similar to programs in other states.