Civil Commitment in Texas and the Illusion of a Rehabilitative Goal
It is not a shattering revelation to say that sex offenders are the true castaways of society. They are considered to be such a threat, so undesirable, and so dangerous, that even when they’ve been convicted, gone to prison, and lived out their prison sentences, the justice system still cannot loosen its grip. The civil commitment program is for sex offenders who have fulfilled their prison sentences, but are still considered too unstable to be released. It is a controversial practice, and has been in the news quite a bit lately, as detailed by this grits blog post.
A total of 20 states and the District of Columbia have civil commitment schemes. The program in Texas is run by the Office of Violent Sex Offender Management (OVSOM), and began in 1991. Recently, public outrage erupted when a house of civilly committed sex offenders were living and being monitored in a Houston neighborhood. Neither the general public, nor residents in the neighborhood, were given notice of the halfway house. In the aftermath of the controversy, the chairman of OVSOM quit.
The purpose is obviously to protect society from serial sexual criminals who are not yet rehabilitated, but a recent Houston Chronicle story casts serious doubt on the effectiveness of the program. The article is ominously titled: “For sex offenders who completed their sentences, ‘the only way out appears to die.’” In 15 years, not one person has moved out of the program and back into society.
State Therapists Determine “Behavioral Abnormality”
To qualify for a civil commitment, a person must have two sex crime convictions. In addition, an offender must present a “behavioral abnormality” preventing him from reintegrating into society. However, this is not a medical diagnosis, it is a legal term interpreted by therapists who work for the OVSOM.
Currently, there are 325 people civilly committed. Texas has adopted an outpatient monitoring system, and is the only state to do so. Offenders generally live in jails, halfway houses, or boarding houses. They are closely monitored and their movements are severely restricted. Each person wears GPS ankle bracelets. If the rules are violated, offenders can be charged with a third-degree felony. And recidivism is high. According to the Chronicle, 44% have returned to prison for rule violations.
The Constitutionality of Civil Commitment Programs
Civil commitment programs have been challenged on double jeopardy and due process grounds. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, has held that involuntary civil confinement is not criminal punishment, and therefore does not violate double jeopardy or substantive due process. The issue of civil commitment statutes has been before the high court three different times, most recently in 2010[1].
But many of these programs, like the one in Texas, are not running in the way they were intended. They essentially offer interminable confinement, and no way out. The Supreme Court has not addressed the issue of how the civil commitment program operates in Texas, which appears to be unconstitutional in application.
Have you been arrested for a crime? Call my office: 817-689-7002. Come into the office for a free and confidential case evaluation. Our office is downtown: 108 Main Street, Fort Worth, TX,76102v
