Opinion ID: 2782450
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Relevant Policies

Text: During Toney’s imprisonment, the TDCJ and related entities promulgated various regulations relating to sex offender classification. Beginning in February 1998, the TDCJ instituted Administrative Directive (“AD”) 04.09: “Sex Offender Identification Criteria and Methods of Recording Information.” The policy was created to “ensure that all sex offenders under its supervision are identified for purposes of: DNA testing, sex offender treatment, release processing, parole decision-making, case management, sex offender registration, and classification decision-making.” Toney would not have qualified as a sex offender under this directive. However, on January 30, 2004, the TDCJ instituted a revised version of the directive, AD 04.09 (rev. 2), which altered the “Sex Offender Identification Criteria” to cover inmates that have a “[c]urrent or prior conviction for a nonsexual offense with a sexual element,” and for whom “an employee of the [Sex Offender Treatment Program] or a registered sex offender treatment provider has concluded that sex offender supervision and treatment is warranted.” On February 20, 2007, the TDCJ enacted another revised directive, AD 04.09 (rev. 1 Toney alleges that he was originally indicted for burglary with the intent to commit sexual assault, but, because the judge “adjudicated that there was no evidence of a sexual assault,” Toney was then “reindicted while dropping the sexual assault.” 2 Case: 14-50331 Document: 00512949977 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/26/2015 No. 14-50331 3), which similarly stated that an inmate may be identified as a sex offender “if an element of sexual behavior is identified and the offender has been convicted of . . . a non-sexual offense with a sexual element.” In addition, beginning in January 8, 2004, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles (“TBPP”) enacted “Special Condition X,” a special condition of parole or supervised release requiring that the parolee, inter alia: (1) “[e]nroll in and participate in a treatment program for sex offenders,” which may include “psychological counseling”; (2) “[s]ubmit to polygraph examinations”; and (3) refrain from engaging in a variety of activities. A parole panel may impose Special Condition X “upon a majority vote.” Under Special Condition X, “[s]ex offender[s]” are defined as “offenders who have admitted, committed, threatened to commit, or are a party to an act which constitutes a sexual offense or sexually deviant behavior.” A July 20, 2006, revised version of Special Condition X provided a new procedure for imposing the condition on offenders with no current or prior sex offense conviction: Before submission of a request to the parole panel to impose the Sex Offender Special Condition on offenders who have no current or prior conviction for a sex offense, the parole officer or TDCJ Parole Division representative shall provide to the offender written notice and opportunity to provide a written response within 30 days. Upon the expiration of the notice period, the parole officer or TDCJ Parole Division representative shall provide credible information in writing to the panel that indicates that the offender has engaged in unlawful sexual conduct and could constitute a threat to society. The policy was revised again on November 18, 2009, slightly modifying the procedure for imposing Special Condition X on offenders with no prior sex offense convictions by changing the last clause from “indicates that the offender has engaged in unlawful sexual conduct and could constitute a threat 3 Case: 14-50331 Document: 00512949977 Page: 4 Date Filed: 02/26/2015 No. 14-50331 to society” to “indicates that the offender constitutes a threat to society by reason of his lack of sexual control.” 2 The parole division of the TDCJ has also promulgated guidelines outlining certain procedures for offenders who are convicted of non-sexual offenses but who are nonetheless identified as sex offenders for purposes of Special Condition X. These guidelines recognize that “[p]ursuant to the United States Court of Appeals [for the] Fifth Circuit and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, offenders who do not have a sex offense conviction are entitled to be heard in person to present evidence, call witnesses, and confront and crossexamine witnesses prior to the imposition of Special Condition ‘X.’”