Evidence – Expert – SDP

Listen to this article

Where a petition for release from civil commitment was denied based on a jury verdict stating that the petitioner remained a sexually dangerous person, a new trial must be ordered because the judge allowed an unqualified person to testify as a qualified examiner.

"In sum, at no point did Dr. [Susan J.] Lewis testify that she had ‘two or more years of experience with diagnosis or treatment of sexually aggressive offenders.' She, therefore, did not meet the requirements imposed by G.L.c. 123A as a qualified examiner. Because Dr. Lewis was not a qualified examiner, it was an abuse of discretion for the judge to allow her to testify as a qualified examiner in this matter. …

"In the circumstances, we cannot say that the objected-to error in admitting Dr. Lewis's testimony ‘did not influence the jury, or had but very slight effect.' …"

LeSage, petitioner (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-060-10) (14 pages) (Smith, J.) (Appeals Court) Case tried before Staffier-Holtz, J., in Superior Court. Harry L. Miles, of Green, Miles, Lipton & Fitz-Gibbon, for the petitioner; Brian P. Mansfield for the commonwealth (Docket No. 08-P-1268) (April 9, 2010).