In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of Aaron Michael Hayes.
A16-734
| Minn. Ct. App. | Oct 31, 2016Background
- Aaron M. Hayes committed sexual assaults against his sister (reported incidents in 1990 and 1998) and assaulted an 81-year-old woman in 2002 (pleaded guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct).
- While incarcerated Hayes had numerous violent disciplinary incidents and violent sexual fantasies; he entered MSOP twice and was terminated both times for threats, lack of progress, and refusal to engage in treatment.
- Psychologist Rosemary Linderman (retained by county) scored Hayes as moderate-to-high risk on actuarial tools (Static-99R, Static-2002R) and recommended civil commitment; court-appointed examiner Paul Reitman also recommended commitment; appellant’s chosen examiner Robert Riedel recommended supervised community release.
- The State petitioned to civilly commit Hayes as a sexually dangerous person (SDP) under the Minnesota Commitment and Treatment Act; after a three-day trial the district court found Hayes met the statutory SDP criteria and committed him to MSOP.
- On appeal Hayes argued the evidence was insufficient to satisfy the three statutory SDP elements: (1) a course of harmful sexual conduct, (2) a sexual/personality/other mental disorder or dysfunction that impairs control, and (3) likelihood of future harmful sexual conduct. The court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Hayes' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hayes engaged in a "course of harmful sexual conduct" | Incidents were insufficient or not properly found; challenges district court findings | Convictions and alleged assaults (1990, 1998, 2002) form a sequence of presumptively harmful sexual conduct | Affirmed — record shows multiple incidents across years constituting a course of harmful sexual conduct |
| Whether Hayes manifested a sexual, personality, or other mental disorder/dysfunction that prevents adequate control | District court erred in finding lack of control; insufficient linkage between diagnosis and lack of control | Examiners found antisocial-personality disorder and substance dependence that impair control; expert testimony tied disorders to lack of adequate control | Affirmed — experts credibly tied diagnoses to inability to adequately control sexual impulses |
| Whether Hayes is "likely" (i.e., highly likely) to reoffend sexually | Risk is not high; good behavior in controlled settings and disputed actuarial reliability undercut a high-risk finding | Multiple Linehan factors favor high risk (violent history, victim variety, actuarial scores, untreated status, prison violence); experts opine high likelihood of reoffense | Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence (Linehan factors and expert opinions) supports high likelihood of reoffense |
| Reliability/use of actuarial tools and weight of conflicting expert opinions | Static-99R and other tools unreliable; one expert recommended community release | Multiple actuarial instruments and experts supported high/moderate-high risk; district court credited commitment-favoring experts over dissenting expert | Affirmed — court permissibly credited experts who applied actuarial and clinical evidence to find high risk |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Civil Commitment of Ramey, 648 N.W.2d 260 (Minn. App. 2002) (defines "course" of sexual conduct and standard of review for factual findings)
- In re Thulin, 660 N.W.2d 140 (Minn. App. 2003) (standard of review for sufficiency of clear-and-convincing evidence)
- Knops v. State, 536 N.W.2d 616 (Minn. 1995) (deference to district court credibility findings when experts form the factual basis)
- In re Linehan, 518 N.W.2d 609 (Minn. 1994) (Linehan I) (factors to consider in assessing future dangerousness)
- In re Linehan, 594 N.W.2d 867 (Minn. 1999) (Linehan IV) (requirement that disorder impair adequate control of sexual impulses)
- In re Civil Commitment of Stone, 711 N.W.2d 831 (Minn. App. 2006) (course-of-conduct need not be recent or identical conduct)
- In re Civil Commitment of Ince, 847 N.W.2d 13 (Minn. 2014) ("likely to engage" construed as "highly likely")
- In re Civil Commitment of Navratil, 799 N.W.2d 643 (Minn. App. 2011) (no single Linehan factor is determinative)
- In re Martinelli, 649 N.W.2d 886 (Minn. App. 2002) (need for expert opinion linking lack of control to diagnosed disorder)