In re Sykes
Decision Date | 10 January 2014 |
Docket Number | No. 108,856.,108,856. |
Citation | 49 Kan.App.2d 859,316 P.3d 811 |
Parties | In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of Paul SYKES. |
Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Syllabus by the Court
1. Freedom from physical restraint is at the core of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. A person civilly committed to Kansas' sexual predator treatment program has the right to assert a claim of an alleged violation of his or her liberty interest. Appellate courts review de novo whether such person's constitutional right to due process has been violated.
2. The Kansas Legislature enacted the Sexually Violent Predator Act, K.S.A. 59–29a01 et seq., to accomplish the following:
3. Proceedings pursuant to the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act are civil in nature, not criminal.
4. Kansas has an interest in ensuring that persons who are found to be sexually violent predators are committed in facilities that are designed to manage their special needs—needs which differ from those of persons suffering from other disorders. Committing such persons for traditional care and treatment of their mental illnesses under K.S.A. 59–2945 et seq. because they are not competent to stand trial under a criminal law standard would frustrate the legitimate purposes of the Act in view of the many procedural safeguards built into the Act to protect such persons' due process rights.
5. A person alleged to be a sexually violent predator pursuant to K.S.A. 59–29a01 et seq. need not be mentally competent under the standard applicable to criminal defendants in order for commitment proceedings under the Act to go forward.
Michael G. Highland, of Bonner Springs, for appellant.
Kristafer R. Ailslieger, deputy solicitor general, for appellee.
Before MALONE, C.J., McANANY and STANDRIDGE, JJ.
Between 1969 and 1987, Paul Sykes accumulated an extensive criminal history. In 1987, he broke into a house in Kansas City occupied by Sharita Watson Calhoun and her sister, Charzetta Wesley Kimble. He approached Sharita with his pants open and his penis exposed. He grabbed her and said he wanted to “do something” with her. Sharita resisted, and Sykes struck both women. The women screamed, and their brother arrived and broke down the door. Sykes fled but was later captured and charged. In January 1988, he was convicted of aggravated sexual battery and sent to prison. Aggravated sexual battery is a sexually violent offense as the term is used in K.S.A. 59–29a02, a provision in the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act, K.S.A. 59–29a01 et seq.
Sykes was scheduled to be released from prison in April 2007. In March 2007, in advance of that release date, the State commenced this civil care and treatment case, seeking to have Sykes committed for treatment as a sexually violent predator under the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act.
At the time the State commenced this suit, Sykes was being held by the Kansas Department of Corrections at the Larned State Hospital. Sykes had a long history of treatment for mental illness, primarily paranoid schizophrenia. He had been in either the Larned State Hospital or the Osawatomie State Hospital approximately six times before the 1987 events that led to his 1988 conviction. After this conviction, Sykes was in and out of the Larned State Hospital numerous times during the period of his incarceration. During this period he was found to be sexually preoccupied and was found masturbating on the ward, particularly in front of females. He exposed and fondled himself and made inappropriate sexual comments in front of the hospital staff. He threatened female staff members and grabbed them in sensitive areas. He was subject to disciplinary proceedings at the Larned Correctional Mental Health Facility for lewd acts. At one point Sykes was released on parole, but his parole was revoked, and he was returned to prison when he failed to complete a community sex offender treatment program.
After the State brought this current action, Sykes waived the preliminary hearing required by K.S.A. 59–29a05 and stipulated that there was probable cause to believe that he was a sexually violent predator. The court sent Sykes to Larned for a psychological evaluation. At Larned, Sykes was evaluated by Dr. John Reid in May 2007. Dr. Reid found that Sykes suffered from paranoid schizophrenia as well as exhibitionism and alcohol dependency. Sykes also had an antisocial personality disorder and borderline intellect. Sykes scored moderate to high on tests for sexual recidivism.
Mark Roberts, a licensed clinical psychotherapist, examined Sykes and concluded that due to Sykes' schizophrenia, he was incompetent to stand trial in these care and treatment proceedings. He recommended that Sykes be transferred to Larned for treatment.
The district court, acting on Roberts' recommendation, found that Sykes was not competent to stand trial pursuant to K.S.A. 22–3302, a provision applicable to persons charged with a crime. The court ordered that Sykes be sent to Larned for up to 90 days for evaluation and treatment pursuant to K.S.A. 22–3303, another provision applicable to criminal defendants.
There followed a civil commitment proceeding for the care and treatment of Sykes as a mentally ill patient, but that action was later dismissed for reasons unrelated to this appeal. We need not discuss it further.
Following yet another mental evaluation of Sykes in February 2011, Dr. Roy Daum found Sykes incompetent to stand trial applying the standards for evaluating a defendant facing a criminal trial. But at the court's hearing 2 months later, the court noted that this is a civil, not a criminal, proceeding. In essence, the court determined that Sykes did not have to be mentally competent in order for these civil commitment proceedings to go forward. The case was set for a jury trial in September 2012.
At trial, Sykes waived a jury, and the matter was tried to the court. Charzetta and Sharita, the victims of Sykes' aggravated sexual battery, testified to the facts that led to that conviction. Dr. Reid testified that Sykes meets the criteria for a sexually violent predator. On cross-examination, he testified that Sykes' antisocial personality disorder was driving his behavior, not his schizophrenia. He noted that there is no necessary connection between schizophrenia and sexually violent conduct.
Dr. Barnett testified for Sykes. He conceded that Sykes probably meets the criteria for a sexually violent predator.
Sykes testified on his own behalf. He was taking his medications at the time of his trial and did not display the grossly disordered thinking described earlier in his medical records. He described the events leading to his conviction. He had been drinking, smoking marijuana, and “having a little fun” that night. He broke into the house in order to steal something, not to have sex with the women in the house. When asked about their testimony that he had “hit them and pulled their night clothes,” Sykes responded: He denied having the zipper on his trousers open and his penis exposed. When asked about his failure to complete the sex offender treatment program at Lansing Correctional Facility, Sykes responded,
In closing argument, Sykes' counsel tacitly conceded that the testimony was sufficient to support a finding that Sykes was a sexually violent predator. “[F]rom the beginning, I have been against having a trial where the respondent is not competent, and I plan to appeal on that issue alone....”
The court found that Sykes was a sexually violent predator, and this appeal followed.
On appeal, Sykes claims that the district court erred in not ordering a stay of the final hearing until he was found competent to stand trial. He contends that even in these civil proceedings, because commitment for any purpose is a significant deprivation of liberty, he was entitled to the due process protection of being competent to stand trial. He seems to take the position that while a mentally ill person who cannot comprehend the commitment process may be committed for care and treatment under our traditional care and treatment statutes, K.S.A. 59–2945 et seq., a sexually violent predator who is similarly mentally ill may not be committed under the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act, K.S.A. 59–29a01 et seq.
We review de novo Sykes' claim that his constitutional right to due process has been violated. Freedom from physical restraint is at the core of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. As a civilly committed resident in Kansas' sexual predator treatment program, Sykes has the right to assert a claim of an alleged violation of his liberty interest. Johnson v....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Sykes
...appeal, and, in a published opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the district court. In re Care & Treatment of Sykes, 49 Kan.App.2d 859, 316 P.3d 811 (2014). This court granted Sykes' petition for review.Sykes raises a single issue on appeal. He contends that due process r......
-
Appellate Decisions
...proceeded to trial, with district court committing Sykes to be committed as a sexually violent predator. Court of appeals affirmed. 49 Kan. App. 2d 859 (2014). Review granted on single issue of whether due process requires that a respondent be competent to understand the nature of a sexuall......