Interest of Johnson
2015 ND 71
| N.D. | 2015Background
- Johnson was committed as a sexually dangerous individual in 2012; this commitment was affirmed by this Court in 2013.
- In August 2013, Johnson petitioned for discharge and a discharge hearing was held.
- The State’s expert testified Johnson remains dangerous; Johnson’s experts testified he no longer meets the criteria.
- The district court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that Johnson remains subject to continued civil commitment.
- On appeal, Johnson contends the district court erred; the court applies a modified clearly erroneous standard of review.
- This Court reverses and remands for specific findings addressing whether Johnson has serious difficulty controlling his behavior (Crane requirement).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly applied Crane's requirement. | State proved dangerousness via predatory conduct and disorders. | District court failed to make explicit findings on serious difficulty controlling behavior. | Remand for explicit Crane findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of J.T.N., 2011 ND 231 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2011)) (modified clearly erroneous standard for sexual-dangerousness review)
- Matter of Wolff, 2011 ND 76 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2011)) (credibility and weight accorded expert testimony in review)
- Interest of Corman, 2014 ND 88 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2014)) (grounds for determining dangerousness; three elements)
- Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (U.S. Supreme Court (2002)) (serious difficulty in controlling behavior required for commitment)
- Matter of Midgett, 2009 ND 106 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2009)) (requirement to prove serious difficulty controlling behavior; remand when not stated)
- Interest of Graham, 2013 ND 171 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2013)) (focus on present/future ability to control behavior)
- Interest of J.G., 2013 ND 26 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2013)) (definition of sexually dangerous individual; nexus to dangerousness)
- Matter of R.A.S., 2008 ND 185 (North Dakota Supreme Court (2008)) (need for explicit factual basis when reviewing findings)