End of Sentence Review Committee Overview

1. End of Sentence Review CommitteeOverview Substitute House Bill 1147 Joint Task Force Meeting August 30, 2005

2. Community Protection Act of 1990 • Mandated state agencies with jurisdiction over the release of sex offenders to review all sex offenders prior to release. • Mandated the sharing of necessary and relevant information regarding sex offenders. • Created the authority to civilly commit Sexually Violent Predators at the end of their term of total confinement. • Enacted Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification.

3. Significant Changes since 1990 • 1995 Recent Overt Acts; Registration for offenders under federal jurisdiction and found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity. • 1997 Risk Level Classification and Notification Process refined; Registration for Kidnapping offenses. • 2001 Indeterminate Sentence Review Board Determinate Plus. • 2002 Joint Forensic Unit established.

4. End of Sentence Review Committee • An administrative review committee established in 1990 as a result of the Community Protection Act. • Reviews all sex offenders releasing from the Department of Corrections, Department of Social and Health Services and the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board for assignment of sex offender notification levels and for civil commitment consideration.

5. Reviews sex offenders sentenced per RCW 9.94A.712 and makes a recommendation to the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board regarding the offender’s likelihood of sexual reoffense if released to the community. • Reviews all registerable kidnapping offenders for notification purposes. • Reviews all crimes against children and makes recommendation for law enforcement notification.

6. Recommends notification to non-law enforcement agencies, such as Department of Social and Heath Services Division of Developmental Disabilities and Children’s Administration Division. • Refers to other Department of Corrections Programs, such as Victim Services Unit and Dangerously Mentally Ill Offender Program.

7. End of Sentence Review Committee The End of Sentence Review Sexually Violent Predator Subcommittee includes the above committee members with the addition of representatives from the King County Prosecutor’s Office and the Washington State Attorney General’s Office.

8. End of Sentence Review Committees • The End of Sentence Review Committee includes the primary committee and three distinct subcommittees: • End of Sentence Review Committee meets twice monthly with additional dates scheduled as needed. • Sexually Violent Predator Subcommittee meets once monthly. • Level I/Child Protective Services Subcommittee meets once monthly. • Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration Subcommittee meets once monthly.

9. End of Sentence Review Committee Process • For each offender being reviewed Committee members are provided with a summary of the offender’s history along with a packet of supporting documents. • Committee members review the provided file material, discuss and vote by a simple majority. If the vote results in a tie, then the End of Sentence Review Chair reviews the case and determines the final outcome.

10. End of Sentence Review Sexually Violent Predator Subcommittee • Reviews sex offenders who appear to meet the criteria of a Sexually Violent Predator as defined under RCW 71.09.020. • Subcommittee cases are referred by the End of Sentence Review Committee, DSHS Mental Health Division, and DSHS Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration.

11. Department of Corrections’ Role Regarding Registerable Offenders • To gather all information available for offenders releasing from DOC confinement. • To compile information and risk assessments into a written format for End of Sentence Review Committee members and for future community notification. • To distribute notification bulletins and letters with a packet of necessary and relevant information regarding sex offenders and registerable kidnapping offenders to law enforcement and outside agencies.

12. How Does Notification Occur? • Law Enforcement is responsible for community notification.The extent of community notification is determined by the offender’s risk level. • Offenders are released at the risk level determined by the End of Sentence Review Committee; however, law enforcement has the ability to mitigate or aggravate the risk level. If this occurs, law enforcement is required to complete a letter of departure justifying the reasons for the change in the risk level. Law enforcement determines the final notification level for all registerable sex offenders in the community.

13. Offender’s Release to the Community • If the offender is required to register as a sex/kidnapper, he/she will undergo a registration process at the institution prior to release. Once released, the offender has 24 hours to report and register with the sheriff’s office in his/her county of residence.

14. Notification Level Classification • Between 1990 and 1997, there was not a consistent method used by state agencies and law enforcement to determine notification levels for registerable sex offenders. • During this time, the Department of Corrections issued either a Teletype, a Law Enforcement Alert or a Special Bulletin to notify law enforcement of a registerable offender’s release from confinement. • During 1997 a consistent method to determine sex offender notification levels was developed.

15. Risk Level Classification • Level I: Those offenders whose risk assessment indicates a low risk of sexual reoffense within the community at large. Information is shared with law enforcement agencies. Upon request, law enforcement may disclose the relevant and necessary information to community members.

16. Risk Level Classification • Level II: Those offenders whose risk assessment indicates a moderate risk of sexual reoffense within the community at large. Information is shared with law enforcement agencies. Law Enforcement discloses the relevant and necessary information to schools, businesses and organizations that serve primarily children, women, or vulnerable adults, and neighbors/community groups near the offender’s residence.

17. Risk Level Classification • Level III: Those offenders whose risk assessment indicates a high risk of sexual reoffense within the community at large. For offenders classified as a risk Level III, in addition to the disclosures as a Level II, law enforcement may also disclose relevant and necessary information to the public at large.

18. Sex Offender Civil Commitment • Sexually violent offense per RCW 71.09.020 • Mental abnormality or personality disorder that predisposes that person to commit acts of sexual violence • More likely than not to re-offend in predatory sexually violent manner if not confined in a secure facility • Predatory means acts directed towards strangers or individuals with whom a relationship has been established or promoted for the primary purpose of victimization or persons of casual acquaintance with whom no substantial relationship exists.

19. If the End of Sentence Review Sexually Violent Predator Subcommittee determines that an offender appears to meet the criteria for civil commitment, a forensic psychological evaluation will be requested. If the evaluation supports the sexually violent predator criteria, the case will be referred by the agency with jurisdiction over the releasing offender to the appropriate prosecuting authority. • The prosecutor reviews the referral and supporting file material and determines whether or not to file the petition for civil commitment. • If the prosecutor declines to file, the offender will release to the community. • If the prosecutor elects to file the petition, the offender is transported to the appropriate county jail pending a probable cause hearing, which is typically held within 72 hours of the filing date.

20. For both the probable cause hearing, as well as any subsequent civil commitment trial, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender is more likely than not to sexually reoffend in a violent, predatory manner if not confined to a secure facility. • This will include investigations regarding the offenders past sexual behaviors and may involve contacting past victims. • This will include subsequent forensic psychological evaluation(s). • The process to civilly commit offenders can take years due to legal delays.

21. Recent Overt Acts • The civil commitment law was amended in 1995 to include those offenders who have previously been convicted of a sexually violent offense, since been released from total confinement, and subsequently committed a recent overt act. • Recent overt act means any act that has either caused harm of a sexually violent nature or creates a reasonable apprehension of such harm in the mind of an objective person who knows of the history and mental condition of the person engaging in the act.

22. Joint Forensic Unit • The Joint Forensic Unit (JFU) was created in 2002 and is comprised of a pre-selected group of nationwide expert forensic psychologists who are uniquely qualified to conduct sexually violent predator and/or sex offense risk evaluations. • The JFU primarily enables centralization of records processing and a fair method of assigning forensic psychological evaluations on behalf of the various agencies (including the Department of Corrections, Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration, Indeterminate Sentence Review Board, and Eastern/Western State Hospitals) that refer sex offenders for consideration of civil commitment.

23. Cases Reviewed July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005 • Total=1319 (1076 adult and 243 juvenile) • Primary ESRC=419 • CPS Subcommittee=403 • Special=254 • JRA Subcommittee=243 • Total reviewed by SVP Subcommittee=44 (less than 1%) • Total Identified for Forensic Psychological Evaluation=35 (80%)

24. Civil Commitment ReferralsJuly 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005 • Total referred=40 • 35 DOC • 3 ISRB • 1 JRA • 1 WSH

25. DOC Sex Offender ReleasesJuly 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005 • Total number of releases: 771 • Level I: 382 (50%) • 27 residence • 164 approved plans • 55 transient • 73 homeless • 63 custody • Level II: 234 (30%) • 19 residence • 111 approved plans • 38 transient • 46 homeless • 21 custody • Level III: 155 (20%) • 10 residence • 44 approved plans • 33 transient • 48 homeless • 19 custody

26. DOC Risk Level DeparturesJuly 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005 • 25 DOC Departures • 7 JRA Departures • Note: This only includes received Departure Notices.