Washington Administrative Code › Title 388 - Social and Health Services, Department of › SPECIAL COMMITMENT CENTER › Chapter 388-885 - Civil commitment cost reimbursement › Section 388-885-013 - Limitations on reimbursement costs related to expert evaluations

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) "Expert evaluation
				cost" means the cost of a professional psychiatric and/or psychological
				evaluation of a person for purposes of assessing and/or rendering an opinion
				about whether such person meets the criteria for commitment, release, or
				conditional release in the civil commitment process under chapter 71.09 RCW.
				The department will pay for the cost of only a single professional at each
				stage of the civil commitment process for the prosecution. The department will
				pay the cost of a single professional at each stage of the civil commitment
				process for the defense. Whenever possible the same expert or professional
				previously used in an earlier stage of the process will be used for a
				subsequent stage of the civil commitment process.
(2) "Supporting expert cost" means the cost
				of a specific physical or specialty testing done by other experts at the
				request of the single expert for the state or defense if such testing is
				normally relied on by the professional community in conducting an evaluation
				and ordered by the court for good cause shown. Such costs are payable as
				incidental costs and are not included in the limitations imposed by WAC
				388-885-035.
(3) The department will reimburse a county
				for costs related to the evaluation of an indigent person by an additional
				examiner only upon a finding by the superior court that such appointment is for
				good cause.
(a) The department shall be
				provided notice of any request and have an opportunity to respond in writing
				and to be heard at a hearing to determine good cause for expert funding in
				excess of amounts allowed in WAC
				388-885-035. Such a notice and
				request shall not be shared with the prosecuting agency, nor shall the
				pleadings, contents and results of the hearing be shared with the prosecuting
				agency.
(b) If the respondent makes
				a claim of privilege regarding the information to be provided to support the
				finding of good cause the court may order that records supporting the
				determination of good cause be produced in camera for determination of the
				applicability of any claims of privilege and to decide the issue of good
				cause.
(c) Any claim of privilege
				made to the information covered herein is not waived by providing the
				documentation to DSHS. If a claim of privilege is made to documents to be
				provided to DSHS the defense may request a sealing order prior to providing the
				documents in order to maintain the privilege.
(d) Prior to any release of such documents or
				information to any other person, agency, or party, the department will notify
				the attorney of record for the respondent involved and provide a reasonable
				time for review and application for a court order preventing the proposed
				release.
(e) In making its finding
				of good cause the superior court shall consider and issue written findings on
				whether:
(i) Any previous expert(s) appointed
				to assist the indigent person lack expertise to address a new area of
				concern;
(ii) The request for an
				additional expert is being requested merely because the opinion of a prior
				expert was not favorable to respondent's position;
(iii) The request is being made for the
				purpose of delaying the proceeding; or
(iv) The previously appointed expert is
				unavailable for testimony at trial.