IN THE MATTER CIVIL COMMITMENT OF M.G.T.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-4184-05T23602-05T2

IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL

COMMITMENT OF M.G.T. SVP 144-00

_________________________________

 

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. 144-00.

Mary Foy, Assistant Deputy Public Advocate,

argued the cause for appellant (Ronald K. Chen, Public Advocate, attorney).

Lisa Marie Albano, Deputy Attorney

General, argued the cause for respondent

(Anne Milgram, Acting Attorney General,

attorney).

PER CURIAM

M.G.T. appeals from an order of March 8, 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).

M.G.T.'s long history of sexually violent and criminal behavior has been described in our prior opinion, affirming an order continuing M.G.T.'s involuntary commitment to the STU.

In re Civil Commitment of M.G.T., No. A-1892-02T2 (App. Div. Dec. 7, 2004). He was convicted of the predicate offense on January 3, 1990, and was originally civilly committed in 2001. On March 8, 2006, Judge Perretti conducted an annual review to determine if continued commitment was necessary. See N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.35. Dr. Kern testified for the State. He related that M.G.T. had refused to speak with him, but that from a review of M.G.T.'s treatment records, he was able to diagnose M.G.T. as suffering from personality disorder NOS and from paraphilia NOS. He testified that the paraphilia will not "just spontaneously disappear." He described M.G.T. as demonstrating "minimal motivation to progress in treatment," "obstinate," and without a "demonstrated mastery over his relapse prevention plan." He concluded that M.G.T. "has a long way to go" and that M.G.T.'s risk "to sexually reoffend in the foreseeable future unless confined in a secure facility for treatment" was "[h]igh." M.G.T. produced no witnesses.

M.G.T. argues on appeal, as he did before Judge Perretti, that his involvement with treatment for some sixteen years "certainly has reduced his risk . . . ." The record does not support a claim that the mere passage of time serves to reduce the risk of reoffense, and Judge Perretti rejected that argument. She accepted Dr. Kern's testimony that the paraphilia, from which M.G.T. suffers, will not "spontaneously disappear." She found, from the treatment notes produced by the State, that M.G.T.'s "participation in group has been grossly inadequate" and concluded that he "is making no progress in treatment . . . ."

The judge found:

The evidence presented has been clear and convincing, and the Court is clearly convinced that the respondent continues to be a sexually-violent predator, suffering from abnormal mental conditions and personality disorders that influence his cognitive, emotional, and volitional capacities in such a way as to predispose him to commit sexually-violent acts.

He has substantial difficulty controlling his sexually-violent behavior. He has grave difficulty controlling his impulses . . . .

As a result of the respondent's serious difficulty controlling his sexually-violent behavior, it's highly likely that the respondent will recidivate and commit sexually-violent offenses if not continued for further care.

 
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-3602-05T2

RECORD IMPOUNDED

 

October 12, 2006