Document: 386 U.S. 605 87 S.Ct. 1209 18 L.Ed.2d 326 Francis Eddie SPECHT, Petitioner,v.Wayne K. PATTERSON, Warden et al. No. 831. Argued March 21, 1967. Decided April 11, Michael A. Williams, Denver, Colo., for petitioner. John E. Bush, respondents. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 We held in Williams v. People State New York, 337 241, 69 1079, 93 L.Ed. 1337, that Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment did not require a judge to have hearings and give convicted person an opportunity participate those when he came determine sentence be imposed. said: 2 'Under practice individualizing punishments, investigational techniques been given important role. Probation workers making reports their investigations trained prosecute but aid offenders. Their high value by conscientious judges who want persons on best available information rather than guesswork inadequate information. To deprive sentencing this kind would undermine modern penological procedural policies cautiously adopted throughout nation after careful consideration experimentation. must recognize most now relied upon guide them intelligent imposition sentences unavailable if were restricted open court witnesses subject cross-examination. And probation report draws concerning every aspect defendant's life. The type extent make totally impractical impossible testimony with Such procedure could endlessly delay criminal administration retrial collateral issues.' Id., 249—250, 1084. 3 That was case where at end trial same proceeding fixing penalty first degree murder involved—whether life imprisonment or death. 4 question is whether rule applies Colorado petitioner, having indecent liberties under one statute carries maximum 10 years (Colo.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 40—2—32 (1963)) sentenced it, may Sex Offenders Act, Colo.Rev.Stat.Ann. §§ 39—19—1 (1963), indeterminate term from day without notice full hearing. Supreme Court approved procedure, it challenged habeas corpus (153 Colo. 235, 385 P.2d 423) motion set aside judgment. 156 12, 396 838. This federal resulted, Appeals affirming dismissal writ, Cir., 357 F.2d 325. here petition certiorari, 968, 516, 17 433. 5 Act brought into play 'is any * (convicted specified sex offenses), large, constitutes threat bodily harm members public, habitual offender mentally ill.' 1. He then becomes punishable following conditions as 2: 6 '(2) A complete psychiatric examination shall made him psychiatrists psychopathic hospital designated district court; 7 '(3) written thereof submitted court. contain all facts findings, together recommendations treatable provisions article; should committed state home training schools ill deficient. also psychiatrist's adequately supervised probation.' 8 followed petitioner's case; examined required prepared prior sentencing. But there no hearing normal sense, right confrontation so on. 9 Petitioner insists does satisfy due process because allows critical finding (1) which confront cross-examine adverse present evidence his own use compulsory process, necessary; (2) basis hearsay involved allowed access. adhere supra; we decline invitation extend radically different situation. These commitment proceedings denominated civil are both Equal Protection Baxstrom Herold, 383 107, 86 760, 15 620, Clause. hold requirements satisfied here. 11 commission crime It makes conviction commencing another ill. new fact (Vanderhoof Colorado, 152 147, 149, 380 903, 904) ingredient offense charged. punishment second even though designed much retribution keep individuals inflicting future harm.1 United States Brown, 381 437, 458, 85 1707, 1720, 14 484. 12 Third Circuit speaking comparable Pennsylvania statute2 13 'It separate invoked crimes. therefore entitled judicial before magnified At such cannot partial niggardly protections. defendant panoply relevant protections guarantees proceedings. afforded safeguards fundamental rights essential fair trial, including against him.' ex rel. Gerchman Maroney, 355 302, 312. agree view. Under Colorado's challenged, invocation means charge leading punishment. unlike recidivist statutes issue 'a distinct issue' (Graham West Virginia, 224 616, 625, 32 583, 56 917) 'must receive reasonable heard.' Oyler Boles, 368 448, 452, 82 501, 504, 446; Chandler Fretag, 348 3, 8, 75 1, 99 4. other words, requires counsel, heard, confronted him, cross-examine, offer own. findings adequate meaningful appeal allowed. quite Minnesota statute3 considered Pearson Probate Ramsey County, Minn., 309 270, 60 523, 84 744, adjudged 'psychopathic personality' represented counsel compel production behalf. 275, 526. None these mentioned Act. deficient measured Amendment. Pointer Texas, 400, 1065, 923. Reversed. 16 HARLAN agrees conclusions reached Court, premises forth concurring result 408, Provisions provided 39—19—5—(3) (1963)); Board Parole has broad powers over sentenced. 39—19—6 (1963)). (Pa.Stat., Tit. 19, 1166—1174 (1964)) provides certain offenses 'if ill,' may, 'in lieu law,' institution period Pa.Stat., 1166 (1964). imposed only undergone received containing necessary impose act. 1167 If court, receiving report, 'shall interests justice (the) act, cause arraigned to' Department Welfare. 1170 After exclusive control him. 1173 (Chapter 369 Laws 1939) laws relating found insane apply 'persons personality.' defined meaning existence characteristics rendered 'irresponsible conduct respect sexual matters thereby dangerous persons.' nature, triggered conviction. committed, just insane. See Mason's Minn.Stat. c. 74, 8992—176 (1938 Supp.).

Category: 0