In re Commitment of Sewell

Respondent was found to be a sexually violent person under the Sexually Violent Persons Commitment Act and was committed to the Department of Human Services. Respondent appealed from that judgment, arguing that he was denied his right to a speedy trial, that the State’s petition was untimely, and that the trial court improperly precluded his expert psychologists from interviewing him. Defendant also argue that the trial court improperly admitted and relied on a psychiatric diagnosis that should have been subjected to a Frye hearing and abused its discretion in limiting his cross-examination of the State’s expert witness. The appellate court affirmed, finding that while respondent had a right to a speedy trial the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying his speedy trial petition due to the pandemic, that the State’s motion was timely, and that the trial court did not err in the admission or consideration of evidence. (FITZGERALD SMITH and PUCINSKI, concurring)