Commonwealth v. Shin

16 N.E.3d 1122 (2014)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

At the Copley stop, many people entered the train and it became very crowded. D boarded with the other passengers and he went to stand “very close” to the victim, so close that he made her uncomfortable, “and he was touching [her] arm on [her] left side.” D lifted his hand and touched the victim between her legs on her upper thigh, within “two inches” of her genital area. She testified that “it was very high on [her] leg.” She lifted up her left arm and, pushing him in the center of his chest, “said watch your hands. [She] pushed him as far as [she] could push him away from [her].” She got off the train at the next stop because she “wanted to get out of the enclosed train car”; D also got off the train at that stop, and the victim watched from the platform as he passed through the fare gate and climbed the stairs toward the station exit. She then felt safe enough to get back on the next train and continue to her intended stop. Videotape footage from the station was obtained and D was taken back to the station. D admitted he did have a problem relating to the incident that they were investigating and that he had medication but was not presently taking it. At trial, D claimed he was unable to “conform [his] conduct to the requirements of the law.” Dr. Susan Lewis, a forensic psychologist, testified for D. Lewis diagnosed D in 2005 with schizophrenia. D has a significant history of hospitalization for mental illness. Dr. Lewis opined that D “has a confirmed severe and persistent mental illness that has been ongoing for the previous [seven] years. When he willingly takes his medication his symptoms are muted although never in complete remission.” D also suffers from the paraphilia called Frotteurism. Frotteurism refers to the paraphilic interest in rubbing against a non-consenting person for sexual gratification. It may involve touching any part of the body including the genital area. At the time of the incident D was not taking his medication. The judge requested further arguments on the issue whether D knew that his failure to take his medication would cause him to act in a manner that was against the law and, if so, whether that would permit a finding that he was criminally responsible. The judge held that D “was aware that if he failed to take his medication, it would result in this kind of behavior once again . … He has had enough contact with the court system and enough treatment by this doctor who testified and other doctors that make it very clear to him that he needs to take his medication or he would be right back where he started.” D was convicted and appealed. D appealed.