Braylock v. Jesson

Summary

The Minnesota Supreme Court considered whether a 2010 amendment to Minn. Stat. § 253B.19, subd. 2(d), applied to a pending petition for provisional or full discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous person. The court held that the amendment merely clarified the petitioner’s preexisting burden of production and did not alter the opposing party’s ultimate burden of persuasion by clear and convincing evidence. The court therefore affirmed the denial of Braylock’s discharge petition.

Holdings

1. The 2010 amendment merely clarified preexisting law by defining the petitioner's existing burden of going forward with the evidence as presenting a prima facie case with competent evidence.
2. Because the amendment clarified rather than changed preexisting law, the amended version of Minn. Stat. § 253B.19, subd. 2(d), applied to Braylock's pending petition.
3. The petitioner bears only the burden of production, while the party opposing discharge retains the ultimate burden of persuasion by clear and convincing evidence that discharge or provisional discharge should be denied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the 2010 amendment to Minn. Stat. § 253B.19, subd. 2(d), applied to Braylock's pending November 2008 petition for provisional or full discharge from civil commitment.
2. Whether the amendment merely clarified the preexisting burden of production or substantively changed the law by imposing a higher burden on discharge petitioners.

Disposition

affirmed