Opinion ID: 2294072
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: First Classification by the Board of Review of Sexually Violent Predatory Behavior

Text: A sex offender registration statute was first enacted in Rhode Island in 1992 (P.L. 1992, ch. 196, § 1). In 1996, the General Assembly repealed the original statute, G.L.1956 chapter 37 of title 11, and enacted the Sexual Offender Registration and Community Notification Act, G.L.1956 chapter 37.1 of title 11, as enacted by P.L.1996, ch. 104, § 1 (the statute). The new statute required the following persons to register his or her address with a designated state law enforcement agency: (1) anyone convicted of an enumerated criminal offense against a minor victim; (2) anyone convicted of a sexually violent offense; and (3) anyone determined by a newly created board of review to be a sexually violent predator. Section 11-37.1-3. The first two categories of offenders were required to register annually for ten years after the date of conviction and to verify their addresses quarterly for the first two years after the date of conviction. Section 11-37.1-4. Those individuals in the third category of offenders were required to register indefinitely until such time as a court might determine that a particular individual was no longer a sexually violent predator; offenders in this third category were also required to register their addresses with the appropriate authorities every ninety days. Id. The statute also provided for community notification. Section 11-37.1-12 mandated the creation of a notification advisory council, the purpose of which was to advise the Attorney General concerning guidelines and procedures that would govern community notification pursuant to the statute. The statute mandated that those guidelines identify factors relevant to [the] risk of re-offense and create a three-tiered classificatory scheme depending on the degree of that risk. Section 11-37.1-12(c)( l ). Offenders at greater risk of re-offense would be subject to more comprehensive community notification than offenders posing a lesser risk. In 1999 (after the commission of appellant's offenses, but before the disposition of the criminal charges against him), chapter 37.1 of title 11 was amended to create a new category of offenses subject to lifetime registration viz., aggravated offense[s], which included most sexual offenses involving sexual penetration and the use or threat of force. Section 11-37.1-2(J), as amended by P.L.1999, ch. 255, § 1. The revised statute required an aggravated offender to register as a sexual offender for life and to update his or her address quarterly. Section 11-37.1-4(c). Thus, having pled nolo contendere to several aggravated sexual offenses ( viz., the abovereferenced four counts of first-degree sexual assault), under the amended statute Mr. Germane is required to register annually in person with local law enforcement and to register his address on a quarterly basis for the rest of his life. Section 11-37.1-4(c). Following Mr. Germane's plea of nolo contendere, the state, acting pursuant to the requirements of the Rhode Island Sexual Offender Registration and Community Notification Act, forwarded appellant's records and information to what was then called the Board of Review of Sexually Violent Predatory Behavior. [8] The board of review was authorized to determine whether a person convicted of a sexually violent offense was a sexually violent predator. [9] Section 11-37.1-6. The board of review received Mr. Germane's case on February 9, 2000. At that time, a field investigator conducted an interview with him concerning preliminary information about his background, the crimes to which he had pled nolo contendere, his plans as to where he would reside and where he would work, and his institutional adjustment. [10] The field investigator's report was also transmitted to the board of review for reference during the classification process. In May of 2000, the board of review transmitted a one-and-one-half page report to the Office of the Attorney General; that report set forth the board's conclusion that Mr. Germane was a sexually violent predator. That conclusion was based upon the board of review's determination that he possesses a personality disorder that makes it likely that he will engage in sexually violent offenses in the future   . The board set forth nine factors contributing to its determination. [11] Approximately a year later, in June of 2001, the state filed a petition with the Superior Court seeking a determination as to whether or not Mr. Germane was a sexually violent predator as indicated in the board's report. There was no further action taken on the case for a number of years, and Mr. Germane remained an unclassified sexual offender in the interim.