civil commitment requirement (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

civil commitment requirement in Texas

12 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2013–2024 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Jones v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 2010 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015Section 841.085(a) of the health and safety code provides that a person commits an offense if, after having been adjudicated and civilly committed as a sexually violent predator, he violates a civil commitment requirement imposed under Section 841.082(a). 3 Applying the test and logic of Jones v. State, 4 the gravamen of the offense of violating civil 3 Id. § 841.085(a). 4 323 S.W.3d 885, 889 (Tex. Crim.

2015Section 841.085(a) of the health and safety code provides that a person commits an offense if, after having been adjudicated and civilly committed as a sexually violent predator, he violates a civil commitment requirement imposed under Section 841.082(a). 3 Applying the test and logic of Jones v. State, 4 the gravamen of the offense of violating civil 3 Id. § 841.085(a). 4 323 S.W.3d 885, 889 (Tex. Crim.

33
In Re Commitment of Fishergreen
tex · 2005 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024See In re Commitment of Fisher, 164 S.W.3d 637, 656 (Tex. 2005) (holding that the SVP Act is civil in nature); see also In re Commitment of Pearson, No. 07-23-00208-CV, 2023 WL 8248052 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2023, no pet. h.) (holding that a requested instruction modeled after the presumption of innocence applicable in criminal cases is inapplicable in a civil commitment hearing because “a civil commitment under the SVP Act is a civil matter, not a criminal trial,” and the requested instruction “is not mandated by statute or by caselaw”).

2024See In re Commitment of Fisher, 164 S.W.3d 637, 656 (Tex. 2005) (holding that the SVP Act is civil in nature); see also In re Commitment of Pearson, No. 07-23-00208-CV, 2023 WL 8248052 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2023, no pet. h.) (holding that a requested instruction modeled after the presumption of innocence applicable in criminal cases is inapplicable in a civil commitment hearing because “a civil commitment under the SVP Act is a civil matter, not a criminal trial,” and the requested instruction “is not mandated by statute or by caselaw”).

11
Compton v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1926 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014See id. art. 13.315.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Jackson v. Virginia red
scotus · 1979
2 sentences

2014Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319 .

2013See id.; Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 .

22013–2014
Tex. Civil Commitment Office v. Hartshorn green
texapp · 2018
1 sentence

2020Laws 2701 , 2711-12 (“If a civil commitment requirement imposed under Chapter 841, Health and Safety Code, before the effective date of this Act differs from any of the civil commitment requirements listed in Section 841.082, Health and Safety Code, as amended by this Act, the applicable court with jurisdiction over the committed person shall, after notice and hearing, modify the requirement imposed as applicable to conform to that section.”); In re State, 556 S.W.3d at 824 ; Hartshorn, 550 S.W.3d at 326 .

12020–2020
In re State green
tex · 2018
1 sentence

2020Laws 2701 , 2711-12 (“If a civil commitment requirement imposed under Chapter 841, Health and Safety Code, before the effective date of this Act differs from any of the civil commitment requirements listed in Section 841.082, Health and Safety Code, as amended by this Act, the applicable court with jurisdiction over the committed person shall, after notice and hearing, modify the requirement imposed as applicable to conform to that section.”); In re State, 556 S.W.3d at 824 ; Hartshorn, 550 S.W.3d at 326 .

12020–2020
Beasley v. Molett green
texapp · 2002
2 sentences

2016In issues five, six, and seven, VanDyke argues that: (l) the civil commitment requirement that he participate in and comply with a specific course of treatment provided by the Office' of Violent Sex Offender Management (“OVSOM”) and shall comply with all written requirements of OVSOM, “permits OVSOM to unconstitutionally fix or alter conditions of Van-Dyke’s civil commitment by written instructions!;;]” (2) OVSOM made an ultra vires decision to discharge VanDyke from the SVP program, and it is a violation of due process to prosecute him for “OV-SOM’s illegal actions[;]” and (3) his prosecution

2016We have further held that the statute “satisfies constitutional due process concerns, and no fundamental liberty right is abridged without due process.” Id. at 613 .

12016–2016
United States v. Leroy Baker green
ca4 · 1995
1 sentence

2015“The goal of a criminal proceeding is to uncover the truth by examining rigorously the reliability of conflicting evidence presented and then engaging in extensive fact finding.” Baker, 45 F.3d at 844 .

12015–2015
Lawson v. State green
texapp · 2009
1 sentence

2013Exercising that authority, it has determined that “[a] person commits an offense if, after having been adjudicated and civilly committed as a sexually violent predator under this chapter, the person violates a civil commitment requirement imposed under Section 841.082.” Id. § 841.085(a).

12013–2013
Jackson v. Indiana green
scotus · 1972
1 sentence

2013Jackson, 406 U.S. at 738 .

12013–2013

Where else courts name it

OR 36 (1991–2026) IL 14 (1975–2024) TX 12 (2013–2024) NJ 9 (2001–2026) AZ 7 (2007–2025) WA 6 (2007–2021) IN 5 (2014–2019) PA 5 (1980–2018) MI 4 (1974–2018) ND 4 (1992–2025) NY 4 (1988–2010) CA 4 (1991–2015) CT 4 (2011–2025) WI 3 (1984–2005) NC 3 (1988–2016) OH 3 (2006–2025) MA 2 (2014–2019) NE 2 (2005–2005) VT 2 (1999–2005) MO 2 (2004–2005) MN 2 (1985–2002)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check