supreme court: sexually dangerous can be kept in prison

Supreme Court: Sexually dangerous can be kept in prison


Posted to: Crime News



myvid = "187346";
mypath = "/simpleview";











The Associated Press
May 17, 2010

By Jesse J. Holland
WASHINGTON
The Supreme Court ruled today that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered "sexually dangerous" after their prison terms are complete.
The high court reversed a lower court decision that said Congress overstepped its authority in allowing indefinite detentions of considered "sexually dangerous."
"The statute is a 'necessary and proper' means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned by who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others," said Justice Stephen Breyer, writing the majority opinion.
President George W. Bush in 2006 signed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, which authorized the civil commitment of sexually dangerous federal inmates.
The act, named after the son of "America's Most Wanted" television host John Walsh, was challenged by four men who served prison terms ranging from three to eight years for possession of child pornography or sexual abuse of a minor. Their confinement was supposed to end more than two years ago, but prison officials said there would be a risk of sexually violent conduct or child molestation if they were released.
A fifth man who also was part of the legal challenge was charged with child sex abuse, but declared incompetent to stand trial.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., ruled last year that Congress overstepped its authority when it enacted a law allowing the government to hold indefinitely people who are considered "sexually dangerous."
But "we conclude that the Constitution grants Congress legislative power sufficient to enact" this law, Breyer said.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, saying Congress can only pass laws that deal with the federal powers listed in the Constitution.
Nothing in the Constitution "expressly delegates to Congress the power to enact a civil commitment regime for sexually dangerous persons, nor does any other provision in the Constitution vest Congress or the other branches of the federal government with such a power," Thomas said.
Thomas was joined in part on his dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia.
Chief Justice John Roberts last year granted an administration request to block the release of up to 77 inmates at a federal prison in North Carolina. These were people whose prison terms for sex offenses were ending. The justice's order was designed to allow time for the high court to consider the administration's appeal.
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act also establishes a national sex offender registry, increases punishments for some federal crimes against children and strengthens child pornography protections. Those provisions are not being challenged.
State laws allowing civil commitments of sex offenders also are unaffected.

I have mixed feelings about this.
On one hand I believe sexual predators pose a huge risk and I am glad to see the legal system taking a greater interest in keeping them off the streets. Reasources are much better spent here on this issue than they are on a bunch of other things the system largley wastes time on like keeping marijuana illegal. [I don't smoke pot but I beleive the war on drugs is largely not worth the money we spend on it.]
On the other hand any precedent for indefinite incarceration AFTER a prison term is completed makes me nervous. It seems to be circumventing the orginial court that heard the evidence and imposed a sentence. I would have preferred to see this addressed by increasing the penalty or sentencing guidelines that the original jury looks at. I would like to know more about the process for how it is determined that someone is dangerous or is not dangersous. Or how is it decided that they were dangerous then but not now. The potential for abuses here seem overwhelming.
What do you think?

We have the Jimmy Ryce Act here in Florida. I do not have a problem with it at all. I have known of a couple local
cases where it was applied, and deservedly so in my opinion.


Jimmy Ryce Samuel James "Jimmy" Ryce (September 26, 1985–September 11,
1995) was a child that was abducted, raped and killed by Juan Carlos
Chavez in Redlands, Florida,
United States.

Contents

//

Jimmy's murder


On September 11, 1995, nine-year-old Jimmy was taking the bus from
school. He was dropped off, along with ten classmates, and had to walk
less than a block to his home. According to the confession of Juan
Carlos Chavez, Chavez blocked Jimmy's path with his pickup truck and
held the little boy at gunpoint forcing him inside the truck. Chavez
took Jimmy to his trailer where he raped him. Later, when he heard a
helicopter hovering above, Jimmy ran to the door and tried to open it
only to be shot in the back by Chavez, who held the child until he took
his last breath. Jimmy was just fifteen days shy of his tenth birthday
when he died.
The child's dismembered body was found three months later
near Chavez's trailer.
[edit] Capturing Chavez


Chavez worked for the Scheinhaus family. He lived in a trailer on
their property. Around the time of Jimmy's disappearance, Scheinhaus
reported several items missing from her home including a handgun and
jewelry. Scheinhaus suspected Chavez, but had no evidence to support her
suspicions. Aided by a locksmith, Scheinhaus entered Chavez's
apartment. She found her handgun and Jimmy's bookbag. She reported her
findings to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
on December 5, 1995. Chavez was found a day later and taken in for
questioning.
Being advised of his rights and after a 55-hour-long interrogation,
Chavez openly admitted to abducting, raping and murdering Jimmy. Chavez
also led police to the boy's body, which was dismembered and hidden in
cement in three plastic planters.
[edit] The murder case


In the fall of 1998, Juan Carlos Chavez was convicted of kidnapping,
sexual assault, and murder. Chavez was given the death penalty. The
Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence on
November 21, 2002.[1] In July 2004, Chavez
filed a motion for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective
assistance of counsel. The motion was amended in May 2005[2] and was heard in
Miami-Dade Circuit Court on January 9, 2007.[3] The circuit court judge denied the
motion on March 8, 2007.[4] Chavez filed a 3.851 Motion Appeal in
the Florida Supreme Court on May 23, 2007 that is pending.
[edit] The Jimmy Ryce Act


The Jimmy Ryce Act (Jimmy Ryce Involuntary Civil Commitment for
Sexually Violent Predators' Treatment And Care Act) was passed
unanimously by the Florida legislature and was signed by Governor
Lawton Chiles on May 19, 1998, becoming effective on
January 1, 1999. The act calls for inmates with sex offense histories to
be reviewed by the Florida Department of Corrections, the Department of
Children and Family Services (CFS), and state attorneys to determine
the level of risk for re-offense. Upon release from incarceration, these
inmates may be subject to civil proceedings and commitment to a secure
facility for treatment. That treatment center, located in Arcadia, was
criticized because treatment is lacking (less than 5 hours per week), it
lacks security (several incidents of murder on site, riots requiring
hundreds of officers to quell) there is no method of restoring civil
liberties (the program has no release stage) being underfunded,
understaffed and located in an old condemned correctional facility.^{[citation needed]} After
running the center for 7 years, Liberty Healthcare was released by the
state as the vendor, and GEO corp was retained. Unfortunately many of
the issues regarding step-down programs, community placement or
aftercare remain unresolved after nearly ten years.
In 2004, residents of the Florida Civil Commitment Center (FCCC) in
the custody of the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF)
filed a civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in U.S. District
Court Middle District of Florida, challenging the lack of sex offender
and mental health treatment provided at FCCC in Arcadia, Florida.
Plaintiffs were all involuntarily civilly confined at FCCC pursuant to
the Sexually Violent Predator Act §§ 394.910, et seq. Fla. Stat. (2003).
Plaintiffs alleged violations of their constitutional rights and the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by the denial of effective sex
offender treatment programs, lack of appropriate mental health care and
the failure to accommodate inmates with disabilities. Plaintiffs
requested certification as a class action and sought declaratory and
injunctive relief. Defendants named in the Complaint were the DCF and
the private corporation Liberty Behavioral Healthcare Corp. that
operated the FCCC pursuant to a contract with the DCF. The court
certified the case as a class action. After Liberty was replaced as the
private contractor, it was dismissed from the lawsuit which proceeded
against DCF. Over the next several years, the plaintiffs and defendants
engaged in intensive discovery and pre-trial litigation. DCF and the new
contractor, GEO Group, implemented significant changes in the sex
offender and psychiatric treatment provided to residents. In the Fall of
2009, plaintiffs and defendants, through their respective attorneys,
filed a joint motion to dismiss the suit in favor of a settlement
agreement. Federal Court Justice Steele accepted the joint submission
and dismissed the class action suit, with prejudice, in November 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Ryce