Kansas V. Hendricks Case Study

The following is a summary of Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997), including information pertaining to the facts of Hendrick’s criminal history, the procedural history of the cases leading up to the Supreme Court decision, the issues surrounding the Supreme Court decision, and the precedent that has been set for future similar cases. Leroy Hendricks, the subject of this legal matter, is an individual who has exhibited a pattern of inappropriate sexual behaviors throughout his lifetime. Hendricks claims that his sexual misconduct first began in 1950 when he was twenty years old and he exposed himself to two females; shortly after in 1957 he received a criminal charge for indecent exposure, for exposing himself to another female victim.

Following his 1972 release, Hendricks participated in treatment for a short time, but eventually quit. After quitting treatment, he molested his stepdaughter and stepson, which led to his 1984 incarceration. Hendricks later acknowledged that his actions were harmful to children, but asserted that he is unable to control his urges. Hendricks’ release for his 1984 conviction was slated for September 11, 1994, due to the nature of Hendricks’ past, the district attorney sought to have Hendricks’ civilly committed. The prospect of civil commitment is the crux of Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997). The same year Hendricks was facing release Kansas enacted legislation to address the civil commitment of individuals known to be sexual predators. The result was the Sexually Violent Predator Act, Kan. Stat. Ann. § 59-29a01 et seq. (1994), known as K.S.A. 59-2901 et seq. (the Act). The civil commitment process is a civil legal process that is separate from criminal proceedings, and occurs after an individual has served a sentence for a criminal

During Hendricks’ civil commitment trial Dr. Befort, the State’s psychologist, testified that despite the fact Hendricks was a diagnosed pedophile he was not mentally ill and he did not have a personality disorder. According to the Supreme Court of Kansas there must be “clear and convincing evidence that the individual is both mentally ill and dangerous (In re Care and Treatment of Hendricks)” before being