Sorrell v. Director, Patuxent Institution

Murphy, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. On December 10, 1970 applicant Barry Wayne Sorrell was adjudged a defective delinquent by a jury under Section 5 of Article 31B of the Maryland Code which provides : “* * * a defective delinquent shall be defined as an individual who, by the demonstration of persistent aggravated antisocial or criminal behavior, evidences a propensity toward criminal activity, and who is found to have either such intellectual deficiency or emotional unbalance, or both, as to clearly demonstrate an actual danger to society so as to require such confine ⁵¹¹ ment and treatment, when appropriate, as may make it reasonably safe for society to terminate the confinement and treatment.” At the trial the State undertook to prove Sorrell’s persistent aggravated antisocial or criminal behavior by introducing evidence of his prior criminal behavior and by the testimony of Dr. Kelman, the staff psychiatrist at Patuxent Institution under whose care he had been placed. The State established that Sorrell had a juvenile record and in particular that in 1964 he was charged by juvenile petition with assault with intent to murder. It showed that, as an adult, Sorrell was convicted of assault with intent to rape two young girls.

Dr. Kelman testified that Sorrell met the definition of a defective delinquent. The basis of Sorrell’s defense was that for a five-year period, between his 1964 juvenile offense and his 1969 assault conviction, he had functioned in society with no manifestation of serious antisocial conduct; and that since his confinement in Patuxent for diagnostic evaluation, he had been in no trouble evidencing such behavior. On cross-examination, the State’s expert witness, Dr. Kelman, stated in effect that while there was nothing in the records of Patuxent or within hi's personal knowledge to show that Sorrell had struck anyone or stole anything during his confinement period of approximately one year, he “would bet,” based on