A. Upon a finding of probable cause the judge shall ascertain if the respondent is requesting expert assistance. If the respondent requests expert assistance and has not employed an expert at his own expense, the judge shall appoint such experts as he deems necessary. However, if the respondent refused to cooperate with the mental health examination required pursuant to § 37.2-904 or failed or refused to cooperate with a mental health examination following rescission of a refusal pursuant to § 37.2-906, any expert appointed to assist the respondent shall not be permitted to testify at trial nor shall any report of any such expert be admissible. Any expert employed or appointed pursuant to this section shall be a licensed psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist who is skilled in the diagnosis and risk assessment of sex offenders and knowledgeable about the treatment of sex offenders, and who is not a member of the CRC. Any expert employed or appointed pursuant to this section shall have reasonable access to all relevant medical and psychological records and reports pertaining to the respondent. No such expert shall be permitted to testify as a witness on behalf of the respondent unless that expert has prepared a written report detailing his findings and conclusions and has submitted his report, along with all supporting data, to the court, the Attorney General, and counsel for the respondent. Such report shall be submitted no less than 45 days prior to the trial of the matter unless a different time period is agreed to by the parties.
B. Each psychiatrist, psychologist, or other expert appointed by the court to render professional service pursuant to this chapter who is not regularly employed by the Commonwealth, except by the University of Virginia School of Medicine and the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, shall receive a reasonable fee for such service. The fee shall be determined in each instance by the court that appointed the expert, in accordance with guidelines established by the Supreme Court after consultation with the Department. The fee shall not exceed $5,000. However, in addition, if any such expert is required to appear as a witness in any hearing held pursuant to this chapter, he shall receive mileage and a fee of $750 for each day during which he is required to serve. An itemized account of expenses, duly sworn to, shall be presented to the court, and, when allowed, shall be certified to the Supreme Court for payment out of the state treasury, and shall be charged against the appropriations made to pay criminal charges. Allowance for the fee and for the per diem authorized shall also be made by order of the court, duly certified to the Supreme Court, for payment out of the appropriation to pay criminal charges.
1999, cc. 946, 985, § 37.1-70.8; 2001, c. 776; 2004, c. 764; 2005, c. 716; 2006, cc. 863, 914; 2007, c. 876; 2009, c. 740; 2011, cc. 42, 446, 448.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case:
Hood v. Com., 701 S.E.2d 421 (Va. 2010).
Hood v. Com., 701 S.E.2d 421 (Va. 2010).
· cites it 18× “Code of Virginia § 37.2-901. Furthermore, if a respondent refuses to cooperate, any expert appointed to assist the respondent shall not be permitted to testify at trial.”
Com. v. Miller, 643 S.E.2d 208 (Va. 2007).
· cites it 8× “Code § 37.2-907(A). Such an expert "shall be a licensed psychiatrist or a licensed clinical psychologist who is skilled in the diagnosis and treatment of mental abnormalities and disorders associated with sex offenders and who is not a member of the CRC.”
Com. v. Jackson, 661 S.E.2d 810 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 2× “For example, the right to the assistance of experts under Code § 37.2-907 has not yet matured at the time of the probable cause hearing.”
Patrick Joseph Wakeman v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 820 S.E.2d 879 (Va. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “2, and in cases involving the civil commitment of sexually violent predators, Code § 37.2-907(A). In those instances where the General Assembly has modified or annulled the requirements of Rule 2:702(a) by statute, “the witness must satisfy those statutory requirements before…”
Com. v. Garrett, 667 S.E.2d 739 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Thereafter, pursuant to Code § 37.2-907, the circuit court appointed Ronald M.”
Ferrara v. Commonwealth (Va. 2021).
· cites it 16× “Ferrara maintains that this statute applies in probable cause hearings only, and that Code § 37.2-907(A) is the provision that governs the commitment hearing itself.”
Givens v. Smith (E.D. Va. 2023).
· cites it 3× “Va. Code § 37.2-907(A) “the judge shall appoint such experts as he deems necessary.”
Commonwealth v. Saylor, 75 Va. Cir. 281 (Charlottesville Cir. Ct. 2008).
· cites it 4× “Boggio were qualified to examine Respondent and to render their opinions as to whether he is a sexually violent predator according to the requirement of Va. Code § 37.2-907. The Commonwealth has proven by clear and convincing evidence that (1) Respondent was convicted of a…”
Thomas v. Commonwealth, 829 S.E.2d 534 (Va. 2019).
· cites it 2× “Code § 37.2-907(A) entitles an indigent SVP to a court-appointed expert in a Code § 37.”
Commonwealth of Virginia v. James Tyler Myers (Va. Ct. App. 2026).
· cites it 2× “” 3 See Code § 37.2-907(A) (providing for appointment of “expert assistance” upon a finding of probable cause that an individual is a sexually violent predator).”
— Va. Code Ann. § 37.2-907(A) — 9 cases
Hood v. Com., 701 S.E.2d 421 (Va. 2010).
“Code of Virginia § 37.2-901. Furthermore, if a respondent refuses to cooperate, any expert appointed to assist the respondent shall not be permitted to testify at trial.”
Com. v. Miller, 643 S.E.2d 208 (Va. 2007).
“Code § 37.2-907(A). Such an expert "shall be a licensed psychiatrist or a licensed clinical psychologist who is skilled in the diagnosis and treatment of mental abnormalities and disorders associated with sex offenders and who is not a member of the CRC.”
Patrick Joseph Wakeman v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 820 S.E.2d 879 (Va. Ct. App. 2018).
“2, and in cases involving the civil commitment of sexually violent predators, Code § 37.2-907(A). In those instances where the General Assembly has modified or annulled the requirements of Rule 2:702(a) by statute, “the witness must satisfy those statutory requirements before…”
Ferrara v. Commonwealth (Va. 2021).
“Ferrara maintains that this statute applies in probable cause hearings only, and that Code § 37.2-907(A) is the provision that governs the commitment hearing itself.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.