Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board
79 Mass. App. Ct. 683
Mass. App. Ct.2011Background
- Doe, incarcerated at the Massachusetts Treatment Center, was classified as a level three sex offender by the board after a de novo hearing.
- Hearing occurred on November 7, 2008, with the hearing conducted via video conference while Doe was jailed.
- Doe had a lengthy history of sexual offenses and other criminal convictions prior to the hearing.
- Prior objections to incarceration and video-conference format were overruled by the board.
- The hearing examiner affirmed the level three designation, citing high risk of recidivism and high level of dangerousness.
- Doe sought judicial review; the Superior Court upheld the board’s decision and procedural posture, leading to appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether hearing incarcerated violates authority or due process | Doe argues incarceration at hearing breaches statutory limits and due process | Board contends authority extends to final classifications during incarceration | Hearing conducted during incarceration upheld |
| Whether video conference impaired due process | Doe contends remote participation undermines due process protections | Board argues regulations permit flexible, adjudicatory video proceedings | Video conferencing did not violate due process; safeguards adequate |
| Whether video-conference format violated evidentiary/credibility rights | Doe asserts inability to present/cross-examine witnesses affected fairness | No witnesses were called; safeguards and observation possible; not prejudicial | No due process violation; credibility determinations not required given no witness testimony |
| Mathews factors support remote hearing policy | Doe claims remote proceedings undermine accuracy and liberty interests | Board emphasizes government interest in efficiency and public safety; safeguards exist | Procedures satisfy due process under Mathews; governmental interests justify remote hearings |
Key Cases Cited
- Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 3974 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 457 Mass. 53 (Mass. 2010) (incarceration and final classification validity)
- Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 1211 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 447 Mass. 750 (Mass. 2006) (de novo review; procedural safeguards)
- Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 972 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 428 Mass. 90 (Mass. 1998) (due process and public safety interest)
- Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 3844 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 447 Mass. 768 (Mass. 2006) (procedural safeguards in classifications)
- Commonwealth v. Knapp, 441 Mass. 157 (Mass. 2004) (due process rights in civil commitments)