BILL REQ. #:  Z-1055.1 

Read first time 02/22/10.   Referred to Committee on Human Services & Corrections.

     AN ACT Relating to containing costs for services to sexually violent predators; and amending RCW 71.09.050, 71.09.090, 71.09.110, and 71.09.300.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

Sec. 1   RCW 71.09.050 and 2009 c 409 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) Within forty-five days after the completion of any hearing held pursuant to RCW 71.09.040, the court shall conduct a trial to determine whether the person is a sexually violent predator. The trial may be continued upon the request of either party and a showing of good cause, or by the court on its own motion in the due administration of justice, and when the respondent will not be substantially prejudiced. At all stages of the proceedings under this chapter, any person subject to this chapter shall be entitled to the assistance of counsel, and if the person is indigent, the court shall appoint counsel to assist him or her. The person shall be confined in a secure facility for the duration of the trial.
     (2) Whenever any person is subjected to an ((examination)) evaluation under this chapter, ((he or she may retain)) the department is responsible for the cost of one expert((s)) or professional person((s to perform an examination)) to conduct an evaluation on ((their)) the person's behalf. When the person wishes to be ((examined)) evaluated by a qualified expert or professional person of his or her own choice, ((such examiner shall)) the expert or professional person must be permitted to have reasonable access to the person for the purpose of such ((examination)) evaluation, as well as to all relevant medical and psychological records and reports. In the case of a person who is indigent, the court shall, upon the person's request, assist the person in obtaining an expert or professional person to perform an ((examination)) evaluation or participate in the trial on the person's behalf. Nothing in this chapter precludes the person from paying for additional expert services at his or her own expense.
     (3) The person, the prosecuting agency, or the judge shall have the right to demand that the trial be before a twelve-person jury. If no demand is made, the trial shall be before the court.

Sec. 2   RCW 71.09.090 and 2009 c 409 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) If the secretary determines that the person's condition has so changed that either: (a) The person no longer meets the definition of a sexually violent predator; or (b) conditional release to a less restrictive alternative is in the best interest of the person and conditions can be imposed that adequately protect the community, the secretary shall authorize the person to petition the court for conditional release to a less restrictive alternative or unconditional discharge. The petition shall be filed with the court and served upon the prosecuting agency responsible for the initial commitment. The court, upon receipt of the petition for conditional release to a less restrictive alternative or unconditional discharge, shall within forty-five days order a hearing.
     (2)(a) Nothing contained in this chapter shall prohibit the person from otherwise petitioning the court for conditional release to a less restrictive alternative or unconditional discharge without the secretary's approval. The secretary shall provide the committed person with an annual written notice of the person's right to petition the court for conditional release to a less restrictive alternative or unconditional discharge over the secretary's objection. The notice shall contain a waiver of rights. The secretary shall file the notice and waiver form and the annual report with the court. If the person does not affirmatively waive the right to petition, the court shall set a show cause hearing to determine whether probable cause exists to warrant a hearing on whether the person's condition has so changed that: (i) He or she no longer meets the definition of a sexually violent predator; or (ii) conditional release to a proposed less restrictive alternative would be in the best interest of the person and conditions can be imposed that would adequately protect the community.
     (b) The committed person shall have a right to have an attorney represent him or her at the show cause hearing, which may be conducted solely on the basis of affidavits or declarations, but the person is not entitled to be present at the show cause hearing. At the show cause hearing, the prosecuting attorney or attorney general shall present prima facie evidence establishing that the committed person continues to meet the definition of a sexually violent predator and that a less restrictive alternative is not in the best interest of the person and conditions cannot be imposed that adequately protect the community. In making this showing, the state may rely exclusively upon the annual report prepared pursuant to RCW 71.09.070. The committed person may present responsive affidavits or declarations to which the state may reply.
     (c) If the court at the show cause hearing determines that either: (i) The state has failed to present prima facie evidence that the committed person continues to meet the definition of a sexually violent predator and that no proposed less restrictive alternative is in the best interest of the person and conditions cannot be imposed that would adequately protect the community; or (ii) probable cause exists to believe that the person's condition has so changed that: (A) The person no longer meets the definition of a sexually violent predator; or (B) release to a proposed less restrictive alternative would be in the best interest of the person and conditions can be imposed that would adequately protect the community, then the court shall set a hearing on either or both issues.
     (d) If the court has not previously considered the issue of release to a less restrictive alternative, either through a trial on the merits or through the procedures set forth in RCW 71.09.094(1), the court shall consider whether release to a less restrictive alternative would be in the best interests of the person and conditions can be imposed that would adequately protect the community, without considering whether the person's condition has changed. The court may not find probable cause for a trial addressing less restrictive alternatives unless a proposed less restrictive alternative placement meeting the conditions of RCW 71.09.092 is presented to the court at the show cause hearing.
     (3)(a) At the hearing resulting from subsection (1) or (2) of this section, the committed person shall be entitled to be present and to the benefit of all constitutional protections that were afforded to the person at the initial commitment proceeding. The prosecuting agency shall represent the state and shall have a right to a jury trial and to have the committed person evaluated by experts chosen by the state. The committed person shall also have the right to a jury trial and the right to have experts evaluate him or her on his or her behalf and the court shall appoint an expert if the person is indigent and requests an appointment.
     (b) Whenever any person is subjected to an evaluation under (a) of this subsection, the department is responsible for the cost of one expert or professional person conducting an evaluation on the person's behalf. When the person wishes to be evaluated by a qualified expert or professional person of his or her own choice, such expert or professional person must be permitted to have reasonable access to the person for the purpose of such evaluation, as well as to all relevant medical and psychological records and reports. In the case of a person who is indigent, the court shall, upon the person's request, assist the person in obtaining an expert or professional person to perform an evaluation or participate in the hearing on the person's behalf. Nothing in this chapter precludes the person from paying for additional expert services at his or her own expense.
     (c) If the issue at the hearing is whether the person should be unconditionally discharged, the burden of proof shall be upon the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the committed person's condition remains such that the person continues to meet the definition of a sexually violent predator. Evidence of the prior commitment trial and disposition is admissible. The recommitment proceeding shall otherwise proceed as set forth in RCW 71.09.050 and 71.09.060.
     (((c))) (d) If the issue at the hearing is whether the person should be conditionally released to a less restrictive alternative, the burden of proof at the hearing shall be upon the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that conditional release to any proposed less restrictive alternative either: (i) Is not in the best interest of the committed person; or (ii) does not include conditions that would adequately protect the community. Evidence of the prior commitment trial and disposition is admissible.
     (4)(a) Probable cause exists to believe that a person's condition has "so changed," under subsection (2) of this section, only when evidence exists, since the person's last commitment trial, or less restrictive alternative revocation proceeding, of a substantial change in the person's physical or mental condition such that the person either no longer meets the definition of a sexually violent predator or that a conditional release to a less restrictive alternative is in the person's best interest and conditions can be imposed to adequately protect the community.
     (b) A new trial proceeding under subsection (3) of this section may be ordered, or a trial proceeding may be held, only when there is current evidence from a licensed professional of one of the following and the evidence presents a change in condition since the person's last commitment trial proceeding:
     (i) An identified physiological change to the person, such as paralysis, stroke, or dementia, that renders the committed person unable to commit a sexually violent act and this change is permanent; or
     (ii) A change in the person's mental condition brought about through positive response to continuing participation in treatment which indicates that the person meets the standard for conditional release to a less restrictive alternative or that the person would be safe to be at large if unconditionally released from commitment.
     (c) For purposes of this section, a change in a single demographic factor, without more, does not establish probable cause for a new trial proceeding under subsection (3) of this section. As used in this section, a single demographic factor includes, but is not limited to, a change in the chronological age, marital status, or gender of the committed person.
     (5) The jurisdiction of the court over a person civilly committed pursuant to this chapter continues until such time as the person is unconditionally discharged.

Sec. 3   RCW 71.09.110 and 1995 c 216 s 14 are each amended to read as follows:
     The department of social and health services shall be responsible for all costs relating to the evaluation and treatment of persons committed to their custody whether in a secure facility or under a less restrictive alternative under any provision of this chapter. The secretary shall adopt rules for the payment of evaluation services. Reimbursement may be obtained by the department for the cost of care and treatment of persons committed to its custody whether in a secure facility or under a less restrictive alternative pursuant to RCW 43.20B.330 through 43.20B.370.

Sec. 4   RCW 71.09.300 and 2003 c 216 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     Secure community transition facilities shall meet the following minimum staffing requirements:
     (1)(((a) At any time the census of a facility that accepts its first resident before July 1, 2003, is six or fewer residents, the facility shall maintain a minimum staffing ratio of one staff per three residents during normal waking hours and one awake staff per four residents during normal sleeping hours. In no case shall the staffing ratio permit less than two staff per housing unit.
     (b) At any time the census of a facility that accepts its first resident on or after July 1, 2003, is six or fewer residents, the facility shall maintain a minimum staffing ratio of one staff per resident during normal waking hours and two awake staff per three residents during normal sleeping hours. In no case shall the staffing ratio permit less than two staff per housing unit.
     (2) At any time the census of a facility is six or fewer residents, all staff shall be classified as residential rehabilitation counselor II or have a classification that indicates an equivalent or higher level of skill, experience, and training.
     (3))) Before being assigned to a facility, all staff shall have training in sex offender issues, self-defense, and crisis de-escalation skills in addition to departmental orientation and, as appropriate, management training. All staff with resident treatment or care duties must participate in ongoing in-service training.
     (((4))) (2) All staff must pass a departmental background check and the check is not subject to the limitations in chapter 9.96A RCW. A person who has been convicted of a felony, or any sex offense, may not be employed at the secure community transition facility or be approved as an escort for a resident of the facility.