In re Harris
541 S.W.3d 322
Tex. App.2017Background
- The State filed a civil petition under the Texas Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVP Act) to commit Bobby Lee Harris as a sexually violent predator; a jury found him an SVP and the trial court entered civil commitment.
- SVP statutory test: (1) person is a repeat sexually violent offender; and (2) person suffers from a behavioral abnormality that makes them likely to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence.
- Harris had four convictions for aggravated sexual assault of a ten-year-old and admissions/uncharged allegations involving other minors; he claimed delusions (e.g., believing a child was actually an adult) and offered testimony minimizing or explaining offenses.
- State expert Dr. Turner diagnosed pedophilia, psychotic disorder NOS, antisocial personality disorder, and sexual deviance; he opined Harris is predisposed to reoffend and likely to engage in predatory acts.
- The trial court granted the State a partial directed verdict that Harris is a repeat sexually violent offender; the jury then decided only the behavioral-abnormality issue and returned a verdict for the State.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Harris) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Legal sufficiency of evidence that Harris suffers a behavioral abnormality making him likely to engage in a predatory act | Evidence of convictions, diagnoses, and expert opinion establish predisposition and risk; that suffices to prove the behavioral-abnormality element beyond a reasonable doubt | Because some offenses may have been caused by delusion/mental illness, there was insufficient evidence that future offenses would be "predatory" (i.e., for primary purpose of victimization) | Affirmed: evidence was legally sufficient to show predisposition to commit sexually violent offenses to the extent Harris is a menace, which subsumes the predatory requirement |
| 2. Factual sufficiency of the same behavioral-abnormality finding | Expert testimony and history of multiple child offenses weigh in favor of the verdict | Contesting the weight/credibility of evidence and arguing delusion undermines predatory finding | Affirmed: factual sufficiency review in civil SVP context shows no risk of injustice and jury rationally supported the verdict |
| 3. Whether court could grant partial directed verdict on repeat-offender element | Rules of Civil Procedure permit directed verdicts; when repeat-offender status is undisputed, partial directed verdict is appropriate even though overall SVP finding requires beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard | Argued SVP Act’s beyond-a-reasonable-doubt requirement precludes directed verdicts because Legislature intended jury to decide SVP status | Affirmed: no conflict — in civil SVP proceedings undisputed repeat-offender facts may be removed from jury via partial directed verdict if no probative contrary evidence exists |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Commitment of Bohannan, 388 S.W.3d 296 (Tex. 2012) (holds the behavioral-abnormality question is a single, unified issue and the condition is the predisposition)
- In re Commitment of Fisher, 164 S.W.3d 637 (Tex. 2005) (SVP civil nature and procedural context)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for legal-sufficiency review beyond a reasonable doubt)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (a jury must resolve fact questions; when evidence is undisputed reasonable jurors can only reach one conclusion)