Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
Facts: The petitioner was committed to a treatment center as a sexually dangerous person in 2002. In 2005, he filed a discharge under §9. The commonwealth filed a motion to exclude two reports prepared by the petitioner's psychologists right before trial in 2009. The jury found that the petitioner remained sexually dangerous and needed to be civilly committed. The petitioner appealed.
Issue #1: Whether or not the written reports of defense expert witnesses retained by a § 9 petitioner for purposes of the § 9 proceeding are rendered admissible.
Yes because by excluding those reports while accepting the reports from CAB would create an imbalance of evidence and would raise serious due process issue. (LP)