In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Steven Merrill Hogy., A16-1577

Background

Steven Merrill Hogy was civilly committed to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) in July 2008 as a sexually dangerous person and sexual psychopathic personality.
In May 2014 Hogy petitioned the special review board for transfer to Community Preparation Services (CPS), provisional discharge, or full discharge; the board recommended denial after a March 2015 hearing.
Hogy requested rehearing before the judicial appeal panel; at the April 2016 panel hearing the commissioner’s MSOP records and a court-appointed psychologist’s March 2016 evaluation were admitted into evidence.
The court-appointed examiner testified Hogy made minimal treatment progress, had not admitted offending, lacked a plan to avoid reoffending, and posed a moderate–to–high risk if released; MSOP records corroborated this testimony.
After Hogy rested, the commissioner and Goodhue County moved to dismiss under Minn. R. Civ. P. 41.02(b); the panel found Hogy failed to meet burdens for transfer, provisional discharge, and full discharge and dismissed his petitions.
Hogy appealed, asking at minimum for transfer to Phase II of MSOP; the court refused to consider a Phase II transfer claim because Hogy never raised it before the special review board.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the panel erred by dismissing Hogy’s petition for transfer to CPS	Hogy sought transfer to CPS (less restrictive, GPS-monitored) and asked court to order transfer	Commissioner and county argued record showed insufficient progress and high risk, so transfer inappropriate	Affirmed: panel properly dismissed under Rule 41.02(b); record supports statutory-factor findings that transfer to CPS is inappropriate
Whether the panel erred by dismissing Hogy’s petition for provisional discharge	Hogy argued he could adjust to open society and be provisionally discharged	Commissioner argued Hogy failed to present a provisional discharge plan and evidence showing no continued need for treatment/supervision	Affirmed: Hogy failed to meet burden of production—no provisional plan and expert evidence showed continued need for treatment and risk to public
Whether the panel erred by dismissing Hogy’s petition for full discharge	Hogy requested full discharge (also sought in district court brief)	Commissioner argued Hogy failed to present prima facie competent evidence of fitness for full discharge	Affirmed (and waived on appeal for inadequate briefing): even on merits Hogy failed burden of production—expert testimony showed ongoing dangerousness and need for inpatient care
Whether appellate court may order transfer to MSOP Phase II despite no request below	Hogy asked this court to order Phase II transfer on appeal	Commissioner contended panel and court cannot consider relief not raised to the special review board; statutory limit on rehearings bars new petitions	Affirmed: appellate court will not consider Phase II transfer because Hogy did not request it before the special review board; issue forfeited under statute and Thiele rule

Key Cases Cited

Foster v. Jesson, 857 N.W.2d 545 (Minn. App. 2014) (standard of review and requirements when dismissing transfer petitions under Rule 41.02(b))
Rydberg v. Goodno, 689 N.W.2d 310 (Minn. App. 2004) (appellate review limits on factual findings)
Larson v. Jesson, 847 N.W.2d 531 (Minn. App. 2014) (standard of review de novo for discharge petition dismissals and requirement to present a prima facie case)
Coker v. Jesson, 831 N.W.2d 483 (Minn. 2013) (burden-shifting framework: petitioner’s burden of production then opposing party’s burden by clear and convincing evidence)
Thiele v. Stich, 425 N.W.2d 580 (Minn. 1988) (court generally will not consider issues not raised to the initial decisionmaker)
In re Application of Olson for Payment of Servs., 648 N.W.2d 226 (Minn. 2002) (issues not argued in appellate briefs are deemed waived)