IN THE MATTER CIVIL COMMITMENT OF F.P.N.

Annotate this Case

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3452-05T23452-05T2

IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL

COMMITMENT OF F.P.N. SVP 302-03

________________________________

 

Argued September 25, 2006 - Decided October 12, 2006

Before Judges S.L. Reisner and Seltzer.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New

Jersey, Law Division, Essex County,

Docket No. 302-03.

Mary Foy, Assistant Deputy Public Advocate, argued the cause for appellant (Ronald K. Chen, Public Advocate, attorney).

David DaCosta, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent

(Anne Milgram, Acting Attorney General,

attorney).

PER CURIAM

F.P.N. appeals from an order of February 22, 2006, continuing his involuntary civil commitment to the Special Treatment Unit (STU) as a sexually violent predator under the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA), N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.24 to -27.38. We affirm.

An involuntary civil commitment can follow service of a sentence, or other criminal disposition, when the offender "suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility for control, care and treatment." N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.26. "[T]he State must prove that threat [to the health and safety of others because of the likelihood of his or her engaging in sexually violent acts] by demonstrating that the individual has serious difficulty in controlling sexually harmful behavior such that it is highly likely that he or she will not control his or her sexually violent behavior and will reoffend." In re Commitment of W.Z., 173 N.J. 109, 132 (2002). The court must address "his or her present serious difficulty with control over dangerous sexual behavior," and the State must establish that it is highly likely that the committee will reoffend by clear and convincing evidence. Id. at 132-34; see also In re Civil Commitment of J.H.M., 367 N.J. Super. 599, 608-11 (App. Div. 2003), certif. denied, 179 N.J. 312 (2004).

F.P.N.'s long history of sexually violent and criminal behavior, beginning in 1989 when he was still a juvenile, has been described in our prior opinion, affirming an order continuing an involuntary commitment to the STU. In re Civil Commitment of F.P.N., No. A-5784-02T2 (App. Div. Dec. 17, 2004). We have no need to recount that history here. On February 22, 2006, Judge Perretti conducted an annual review to determine if continued commitment was necessary. See N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.35. Dr. Zeiguer testified for the State. He diagnosed F.P.N. as suffering from paraphilia NOS and personality disorder NOS and testified that F.P.N. was "totally unresponsive to all attempts to any kind of therapy." As a result, the "risk to sexually re-offend in the foreseeable future unless confined to a secure facility for treatment" was "very, very, very high." F.P.N. produced no witnesses.

Judge Perretti, in a thorough opinion, reviewed the evidence and accepted Dr. Zeiguer's opinion as to the likelihood of a re-offense if F.P.N. were released. She concluded "from the clear and convincing evidence that [F.P.N.] continues to be a sexually violent predator suffering from abnormal mental conditions and personality disorders that adversely impact his volitional, emotional, and cognitive capacities so as to predispose him to commit sexually violent acts." She also found that "it is highly likely that he will recidivate if not [confined for] further care and custody."

The record under review justifies the continued commitment under the SVPA. There is a narrow scope of review of an order for commitment. See In re Civil Commitment of V.A., 357 N.J. Super. 55, 63 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 177 N.J. 490 (2003). We can modify the order "only where the record reveals a clear abuse of discretion. " In re Civil Commitment of J.P., 339 N.J. Super. 443, 459 (App. Div. 2001) (citing State v. Fields, 77 N.J. 282, 311 (1978)). This is not such a case. Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

Affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

4

A-3452-05T2

RECORD IMPOUNDED

October 12, 2006

 


Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.