The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCP-21-CR-2227-2005 COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : V. : : ROBERT LEE WOODALL, II : CP-21-CR-2227-2005 IN RE: SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR DETERMINATION OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., May 23, 2007:-- 1 Defendant, Robert Lee Woodall, II, was convicted by a jury of rape, statutory 2345 sexual assault, sexual assault, indecent assault, and corruption of a minor. An order was entered for an assessment of whether, under Megan’s Law II, 42 Pa.C.S. Sections 9791-9799, defendant is a “sexually violent predator.” “Predatory” is defined in Section 9792 as: “An act directed at a stranger or at a person with whom a relationship has been initiated, established, maintained or promoted, in whole or in part, in order to facilitate or support victimization.” Section 9792 defines “sexually violent predator” as: A person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense who is as set forth in section 9795.1 (relating to registration) and determined to be a sexually violent predator under section 9795.4 due toa mental abnormality or personality (relating to assessments) disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory __________ 1 18 Pa.C.S. § 3121(a)(1). 2 18 Pa.C.S. § 3122.1. 3 18 Pa.C.S. § 3124.1. 4 18 Pa.C.S. § 3126(a)(1). 5 18 Pa.C.S. § 6301(a)(1). CP-21-CR-2227-2005 sexually violent offenses . . . . (Emphasis added.) A “mental abnormality” is defined in Section 9792 as: “A congenital or acquired condition of a person that affects the emotional or volitional capacity of the person in a manner that predisposes that person to the commission of criminal sexual acts to a degree that makes the person a menace to the health and safety of other persons.” The Commonwealth has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that defendant is a sexually violent predator. 42 Pa.C.S. § 9795.4(e)(3). Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that is “so clear, direct, weighty, and convincing as to enable [the fact-finder] to come to a clear conviction, without hesitancy, of the truth of Lessner v. Rubinson, the precise facts in issue.” 527 Pa. 393 (1991). In Commonwealth v. Krouse, 799 A.2d 835 (Pa. Super. 2002), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania stated: [W]e strongly recommend that trial courts present specific findings of fact regarding the findings necessary for a SVP determination as defined in Section 9792 and the factors specified in Section 9795.4(b) which the legislature has deemed relevant. Section 9795.4(b) of Megan’s Law II specifies that an assessment shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) Facts of the current offense, including: (i) Whether the offense involved multiple victims. (ii) Whether the individual exceeded the means necessary to achieve the offense. (iii) The nature of the sexual contact with the victim. (iv) Relationship of the individual to the victim. (v) Age of the victim. (vi) Whether the offense included a display of unusual cruelty by the individual during the commission of the crime. -2- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 (vii) The mental capacity of the victim. (2) Prior offense history, including: (i) The individual’s prior criminal record. (ii) Whether the individual completed any prior sentences. (iii) Whether the individual participated in available programs for sexual offenders. (3) Characteristics of the individual, including: (i) Age of the individual. (ii) Use of illegal drugs by the individual. (iii) Any mental illness, mental disability or mental abnormality. (iv) Behavioral characteristics that contribute to the individual’s conduct. (4) Factors that are supported in a sexual offender assessment filed as criteria reasonably related to the risk of reoffense. We will review these criteria. WHETHER THE OFFENSES INVOLVED MULTIPLE VICTIMS The offense involved one victim. WHETHER DEFENDANT EXCEEDED THE MEANS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE OFFENSES Defendant did not exceed the means necessary to achieve the offenses. THE NATURE OF THE SEXUAL CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM The victim was “hanging out” at defendant’s home in Mount Holly Springs in order to avoid a nighttime curfew. At approximately 3:30 a.m., on August 23, 2005, the victim was on defendant’s front porch. She spit on the porch. Defendant squeezed the top of her shoulders, pushed her to the side of the house, pushed her down, held her on some steps, pulled her pants down, and raped her. The victim was a virgin before the attack. A sexual assault nurse examiner saw her at 9:30 p.m., on August 24, 2005. There was a recent tear into her posterior fourchette of the type often found when -3- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 sexual intercourse has been achieved through force. There was bleeding at the hymen with a recent laceration (tear). The hymen is a tissue that lies right over the opening of the vagina. RELATIONSHIP OF DEFENDANT TO THE VICTIM Acquaintance. AGE OF THE VICTIM The victim was fifteen years old at the time of the offenses. WHETHER THE OFFENSES INCLUDED A DISPLAY OF UNUSUAL CRUELTY BY DEFENDANT DURING THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIMES The offenses did not display unusual cruelty by defendant during the commission of the crimes. THE MENTAL CAPACITY OF THE VICTIM The victim has normal mental capacity. PRIOR CRIMINAL RECORD Defendant has the following criminal conviction record: 1988 , unlawful delivery of controlled substances. 1989 , theft by unlawful taking. 1992 , aggravated assault. 1996 , attempt to deliver controlled substances, theft by unlawful taking, unlawful delivery of a schedule II controlled substance, and unlawful delivery of a schedule II controlled substance. -4- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 1998 , false report to a law enforcement officer, criminal conspiracy. 2000 , theft by deception. WHETHER DEFENDANT HAS COMPLETED ANY PRIOR SENTENCES Defendant completed a three month to twenty-three month sentence for the 1988 drug offense and a concurrent three month to twenty-three month sentence for the 1989 theft. He completed an eleven month to twenty-three month sentence for the 1992 aggravated assault. He completed a fifteen month to thirty month sentence in a state correctional institution with concurrent sentences on the other 1996 convictions. He completed a four month to twenty-four month sentence in a state correctional institution for the 1998 false report and criminal conspiracy convictions. WHETHER DEFENDANT PARTICIPATED IN AVAILABLE PROGRAMS FOR SEXUAL OFFENDERS Defendant has not participated in such programs. AGE OF DEFENDANT Defendant is forty-four years old having been born on February 27, 1963. USE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS BY DEFENDANT Defendant told his probation officer that he used marijuana and cocaine on a regular basis when he was younger. He is a convicted drug offender. ANY MENTAL ILLNESS, MENTAL DISABILITY OR MENTAL ABNORMALITY Defendant has the mental abnormality of a personality disorder NOS with antisocial traits. -5- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 BEHAVIORAL CHARACTERISTIC OF DEFENDANT THAT CONTRIBUTED TO HIS CONDUCT His mental abnormality which predisposes him to channel his physical aggression, anger and hostility in criminal behavior. FACTORS THAT ARE SUPPORTED IN A SEXUAL OFFENDERS ASSESSMENT FILED AS CRITERIA REASONABLY RELATED TO THE RISK OF REOFFENSE Jane Etter is a Board member of the Sexual Offender Assessment Board who holds a master’s degree in clinical psychology and is certified in the state of Virginia as 6 a sexual offender treatment provider. She offered an opinion that defendant has the 7 mental abnormality of a personality disorder NOS with antisocial traits. Defendant’s conduct was predatory because, at age 42, he utilized his acquaintance with a fifteen- year-old female, who was hanging out at his house in the middle of the night, to sexually assault her when he got angry because she spit on his porch. The sexual offense was an avenue of expressing power and control over the victim. It facilitated victimization. Etter was of the opinion that defendant met the criteria of a sexually violent predator. DISCUSSION Stanley Schneider is a practicing psychologist. He interviewed defendant and conducted some tests. He did not disagree with Jane Etter’s diagnosis of defendant as __________ 6 No such certification is available in Pennsylvania. 7 Defendant did not submit to an interview with Etter. -6- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 having a personality disorder NOS with antisocial traits, adding that there were narcissistic traits. He found that defendant is egotistical, self-centered, and had a sense of entitlement. Schneider testified that defendant has a pacemaker and is currently taking eight medications. He learned from defendant’s urologist that there is an assessment of erectile dysfunction. Placing primary emphasis on the fact that defendant’s prior convictions did not involve any sexual offenses, Schneider was of the opinion that he is not likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses in the future. Defendant’s 1992 conviction for aggravated assault, for which he served a sentence in a state correctional institution, was a violent assault against a female. Notwithstanding defendant’s infirmities, this forcible rape was committed on a vulnerable, at risk, fifteen-year-old girl. We agree with Etter who concluded that there is predatory behavior based on the subject offenses in combination with antisocial behaviors of defendant’s mental abnormality. Defendant established a relationship with the teenager by allowing her, as well as others, to hangout at his house in the middle of the night in part to facilitate and support victimization. He used forcible sex in taking out his anger on the victim. He is a sexually violent predator, who, due to his mental abnormality, is likely, given an opportunity, to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses. Accordingly, the following order is entered. ORDER OF COURT -7- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 IT IS ORDERED AND NOW, this day of May, 2007, that defendant is a sexually violent predator. -8- CP-21-CR-2227-2005 By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. Christylee Peck, Esquire For the Commonwealth Arla Waller, Esquire For Defendant Probation :sal -9- COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : V. : : ROBERT LEE WOODALL, II : CP-21-CR-2227-2005 IN RE: SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR DETERMINATION ORDER OF COURT IT IS ORDERED AND NOW, this day of May, 2007, that defendant is a sexually violent predator. By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. Christylee Peck, Esquire For the Commonwealth Arla Waller, Esquire For Defendant Probation :sal