Opinion ID: 2262065
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: DSHS regulations authorize a polygraph as part of the pretrial evaluation.

Text: ¶ 29 Contrary to the majority's view, DSHS's regulations allow a clinician to use a polygraph when evaluating an SVP. WAC 388-880-010 defines evaluation as an examination, report, or recommendation by a professionally qualified person to determine if a person has a personality disorder and/or mental abnormality which renders the person likely to engage in predatory acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility. WAC 388-880-030(2) provides that the evaluation must be conducted pursuant to WAC 388-880-033, which sets forth the qualifications for evaluators, and must be in the form required by and filed in accordance with WAC 388-880-034 and -036. WAC 388-880-030(2). WAC 388-880-034 to 036 therefore govern the evaluation. In relevant part, these regulations read: WAC 388-880-034 EvaluatorPretrial evaluation responsibilities. The evaluation done in accordance with WAC 388-880-030(1) in preparation for a trial or hearing must be based on the following: (1) Examination of the resident, including a forensic interview and a medical examination, if necessary; (2) Review of the following records, tests or reports relating to the person: .... (d) Psychological and psychiatric testing, diagnosis and treatment, and other clinical examinations ...; (e) Medical and physiological testing, including plethysmography and polygraphy; WAC 388-880-035 Refusal to participate in pretrial evaluation. If the person refuses to participate in examinations, forensic interviews, psychological testing or any other interviews necessary to conduct the initial evaluation under WAC 388-880-030(1), the evaluator must notify the SCC. The SCC will notify the prosecuting agency for potential court enforcement. WAC 388-880-036 Pretrial evaluationReporting. (1) The evaluation must be in the form of a declaration or certification... and must be prepared by a professionally qualified person. (2) The report of the evaluation must include: (a) A description of the nature of the examination; (b) A diagnosis of the mental condition of the person; (c) A determination of whether the person suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder; (d) An opinion as to whether the person meets the definition of a sexually violent predator. ¶ 30 At first blush, WAC 388-880-034 seems to preclude polygraph testing during the pretrial evaluation. WAC 388-880-034(1) requires the evaluator to examine the person, including a forensic interview and a medical examination, if necessary, but does not mention polygraphs. In contrast, WAC 388-880-034(2)(d) and (e) mention several types of records the evaluator must consider, including records from psychological testing and medical testing such as the polygraph or plethysmography. Because the polygraph is specifically mentioned in the second, records-review subsection but not in the first, examination subsection, there is an argument that the evaluator may conduct only a medical examination or forensic interview, not a polygraph. ¶ 31 But, WAC 388-880-034 cannot be read to limit the evaluation solely to a medical examination and forensic interview because the next regulation presupposes that the evaluation is broader than that: If the person refuses to participate in examinations, forensic interviews, psychological testing or any other interviews necessary to conduct the initial evaluation under WAC 388-880-030(1), the evaluator must notify the SCC. WAC 388-880-035 (emphasis added). First, the term examinations and forensic interviews are plural, suggesting that an evaluation may require more than one of each. Second, psychological testing and other interviews do not appear in WAC 388-880-034(1) at all. Crucially, psychological testing appears in the records-review section, WAC 388-880-034(2), and yet is considered part of the evaluation in WAC 388-880-035. Thus, it cannot be true that methods that appear only in WAC 388-880-034(2) are necessarily excluded from the evaluation. Instead, the evaluator has discretion to perform psychological testing or other interviews in addition to medical examinations or forensic interviews when performing his initial evaluation. [4] ¶ 32 The terms medical examination, forensic interview, and other interview are not defined in either the SVP statute or this portion of the WACs. WAC 388-880-034(2)(e) designates polygraph records as a form of medical or physiological testing relevant to the pretrial evaluation. Essentially, a polygraph is an interview in which the subject is asked to answer questions while physiological data are recorded. So, a polygraph fits within the term medical examination as a form of medical testing, within forensic interview as a form of interview undertaken in anticipation of trial, or within other interview if it is conceived of as a diagnostic interview. ¶ 33 In sum, DSHS's regulations afford the evaluator some discretion to conduct tests beyond a mere physical examination when evaluating an alleged SVP. Because a polygraph fits within the terms of other permissible evaluation techniques, and because the regulations clearly contemplate that polygraph records can be reviewed during a pretrial evaluation, see WAC 388-880-034(2)(e), I would conclude that the evaluator may use a polygraph during the pretrial evaluation. The trial court did not exceed its authority or abuse its discretion in directing Hawkins to comply with the evaluator's authorized request. [5]