In Re The Detention Of Troy Belcher
196 Wash. App. 592
| Wash. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Troy Belcher, with two juvenile adjudications for sexual offenses (rape and attempted rape committed at ages 13–15), was civilly committed as a sexually violent predator (SVP) and confined at McNeil Island SCC following a jury verdict upheld on appeal.
- He petitioned in 2014 for an unconditional discharge trial asserting he had so changed; the trial court granted a show-cause and Belcher waived a jury, proceeding to a bench trial.
- State expert Dr. Brian Judd reviewed extensive records, interviewed Belcher, used VRAG‑R and PCL‑R, diagnosed antisocial personality disorder with high psychopathy and concluded Belcher remained likely to commit predatory sexual violence if released.
- Defense expert Dr. Brian Abbott testified Belcher no longer met SVP criteria; the trial court found Abbott not credible and credited Dr. Judd’s opinions and records-based risk assessment.
- The trial court found Belcher continued to meet the statutory SVP definition and ordered continued confinement; Belcher appealed alleging due process violations, insufficient evidence of likelihood to reoffend and of a qualifying mental abnormality, and expert qualification errors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Belcher) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use of juvenile adjudications as predicates | Juvenile offenses cannot constitutionally support lifelong SVP confinement | SVP commitment is civil, statute includes juvenile adjudications, procedures and reviews protect liberty | Court rejected challenge; juvenile adjudications are permissible predicates; claim waived and distinguishable from Eighth Amendment juvenile sentencing cases |
| Sufficiency of evidence of likelihood to reoffend | State’s risk tools (e.g., VRAG‑R) are inappropriate for juvenile‑onset offenses and do not prove sexual recidivism likelihood | Expert used multiple accepted actuarial and clinical tools, records, interviews; VRAG‑R and PCL‑R accepted in community and informed clinical judgment | Court held substantial evidence supported finding Belcher likely to engage in predatory sexual violence if released |
| Sufficiency of evidence of mental abnormality (APD with psychopathy) | Antisocial personality disorder / psychopathy diagnosis alone is insufficient; expert unqualified | Diagnosis, psychopathy level, history, and expert linkage to lack of control satisfy statutory mental abnormality/personality disorder definitions | Court held evidence supported conclusion Belcher suffers a qualifying mental abnormality; APD + high psychopathy meets statute and precedent |
| Expert qualification challenge | Dr. Judd (or State expert) lacked specific forensic psychologist licensing to diagnose APD | No statutory requirement for separate forensic license; challenge not preserved at trial | Court declined to consider as issue on appeal (not preserved); rejected claim that separate forensic licensure is required |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Det. of Morgan, 180 Wn.2d 312 (Wash. 2014) (due process standards and purpose of SVP scheme)
- In re Det. of Thorell, 149 Wn.2d 724 (Wash. 2003) (standard for sufficiency of evidence in SVP commitments and use of actuarial tools)
- In re Pers. Restraint of Young, 122 Wn.2d 1 (Wash. 1993) (SVP statute constitutionality and role of personality disorder)
- Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (U.S. 2002) (requirements for civil commitment: procedures, dangerousness, and mental abnormality)
- Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (U.S. 1997) (upholding civil commitment of sexually violent predators)
- Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (U.S. 1979) (standard for civil commitment burdens)
- In re Det. of Anderson, 185 Wn.2d 79 (Wash. 2016) (juvenile adjudications permissible as SVP predicate offenses)