State v. James Z.
In June 2010, the petitioner commenced a proceeding under the Mental Hygiene Law to civilly manage the respondent, alleging he was a sex offender requiring confinement due to a mental abnormality. After a jury trial, the respondent was found to be a detained sex offender with a mental abnormality, and subsequently committed to a secure treatment facility with his consent. The respondent appealed, contending that the jury's finding was against the weight of the evidence and that Supreme Court erred by allowing testimony about misconduct from his presentence report and using a confusing verdict sheet. The appellate court affirmed the order, determining that the jury's verdict was supported by expert testimony from multiple psychologists and that there were no errors in the court's evidentiary or procedural decisions. The court deferred to the jury's credibility determinations regarding the competing expert opinions on respondent's mental abnormality.