Footnotes (222)



Delineating Sexual Dangerousness

Fredrick E. Vars

University of Alabama - School of Law

May 1, 2012

Houston Law Review, Vol. 50, Forthcoming
U of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 2050994

Only “dangerous” individuals may be indefinitely detained. Is a one percent chance of a future crime clear and convincing evidence of dangerousness? For sex offenders, fear and uncertainty in case law leave open this passage to limbo. This article closes it.

The due process balancing test used to evaluate standards of proof provides the framework. This article explains the relationship between the standard of proof and the definition of “dangerous” and argues that only an approach combining the two is consistent with the Constitution.

Applying decision theory with assumptions favoring the government, this article calculates a minimum likelihood of recidivism for commitment. Of the 20 jurisdictions with sex offender commitment, just one requires something close to that constitutional floor. Thousands have been detained applying unconstitutional standards, and the vast majority remains so.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 41

Keywords: sexually violent predator, civil commitment, preventive detention, due process, standards of proof, dangerousness

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: May 4, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Vars, Fredrick E., Delineating Sexual Dangerousness (May 1, 2012). Houston Law Review, Vol. 50, Forthcoming; U of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 2050994. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2050994

Contact Information

Fredrick E. Vars (Contact Author)
University of Alabama - School of Law ( email )
P.O. Box 870382
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487
United States
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,068
Downloads: 149
Download Rank: 143,401
Footnotes:  222

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.188 seconds