Joseph R. Nevotti, Ph.D., Q.M.E. Licensed Psychologist 2023 East Sims Way Port Townsend, Washington

Transcription

1 Joseph R. Nevotti, Ph.D., Q.M.E. Licensed Psychologist 2023 East Sims Way Port Townsend, Washington August 2, 2012 Attorney At your request, I have conducted a forensic evaluation of Mr. Anthony Morales, X My evaluation, 1 as summarized in this report, was conducted following a faceto-face interview and mental status exam of Mr. Morales at XXX State Prison (XSP) together with a review of Mr. Morales Central File which included, but was not limited to, the following documents: Probation Officer s Report (POR), XXX, Deputy Probation Officer, 6/06/90; Life Prisoner Evaluation, Subsequent Parole Consideration Hearing, XSP, XX, Correctional Counselor I (CC 1), 2012; Life Prisoner Evaluation, Initial Parole Consideration Hearing, XXSP, XXXX, CC 1, 2007; Life Prisoner Evaluation, Post Conviction Progress Report, XXSP, XXXXX, CC 1, 2002; Life Prisoner Evaluation, Post Conviction Progress Report, XXXSP, XX, CC 1, 1998; Institutional Gangs Information Unit Chrono, R. XXX, Correctional Sergeant, XX State Prison, 2009; Comprehensive Risk Assessment, D. Robinson, Ph.D. and S. Walker, Ph.D., Forensic Assessment Division (FAD), 2012 (Date Approved ); Psychological Evaluation, S. Renfeldt, Ph.D. and J. Tehrani, Ph.D., Forensic Assessment Division (FAD), In addition, my assessment includes information from the following sources: Interview with Lt. XXXX, CDCR Correctional Lieutenant, Institutional Gangs Information Unit, XSP, 6/18/12; and Review of Mr. Morales Parole Portfolio. 1 Dr. Nevotti has 30+ years experience as a licensed psychologist. As a CDCR contract psychologist he conducted psychological evaluations and case management with approximately 1,800 CDCR inmates at Pelican Bay, High Desert, Corcoran, Lancaster, Salinas Valley, Pleasant Valley, Avenal, Soledad, WASCO, the Correctional Medical Facility. Selected and trained as member of FAD in 2006; Performed 100+ BPT/BPH evaluations for CDCR; and 80+ SVP evaluations at Coalinga State Hospital. Curriculum Vitae attached. Page 1 of 8

2 This report is organized as follows: Psychological Assessment of Mr. Morales; Review and critique of Comprehensive Risk Assessment conducted by D. Robinson, Ph.D.; Review and critique of Parole Portfolio authored by Mr. Morales. PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF MR. MORALES Current Mental Status. Mr. Morales was interviewed at XSP, and he was wearing standard prison-issue clothing. He presented with adequate grooming and hygiene, and he exhibited no unusual aspects of psychomotor functioning or physical appearance. He was alert and responsive throughout the interview, he was oriented to person, place and time, and there were no indications of neuropsychological impairment. He was polite and cooperative, and displayed a pleasant attitude toward me. He appeared at ease during the interview and he was appropriately assertive. His activity level was appropriate, and he showed no signs of fatigue or physical discomfort. The volume and rate of his speech was normal, and he spoke in a clear and intelligible manner. His ability to orally communicate was within normal limits. He displayed no symptoms of a mood disorder and his affect was within normal limits. There were no indications of bizarre or delusional thinking processes, thought disorder or hallucinatory activity. Mr. Morales denied any thoughts hurting himself or others. My assessment of Mr. Morales psychosocial history is in agreement with available information; Pursuant to my interview on 6/18/12 with Lt. XXX of the Institutional Gang Unit, Mr. Morales is not a validated member or associate of a prison gang per CDCR criteria (CCR 3378); Available records do not indicate that Mr. Morales suffers from any medical conditions that impair his Activities of Daily Living (i.e. ADLs) or impair his ability to live and work independently. Mr. Morales does have a history of Substance Abuse, and meets criteria for Poly- Substance Dependence, In a Controlled Environment, per DSM-IV-TR; Mr. Morales does meet criteria for Adult Anti-Social Behavior (V71.01, DSM-IV- TR, p. 740), but he does not meet criteria for Anti-Social Personality Disorder 2 ; Mr. Morales criminal history is limited to his Life Crime and his rules violations during incarceration 3 ; 2 I am in agreement with the diagnosis rendered by BPH psychologist Dr. Renfeldt. Mr. Morales C-file provides no evidence of the active, overt and deliberate aggression inherent in Conduct Disorder. Dr. Robinson s diagnosis of ASPD is a reflection of her negative, subjective bias demonstrated throughout her report, e.g. her misrepresentation of the XXXX chrono of 9/10/09, to wit: that IGU had concluded that Mr. Morales was an active associate of the Mexican Mafia (Robinson, 2012, p. 19). 3 It is noteworthy that Mr. Morales 115s are related to substance abuse or passive compliance with antisocial inmates. Page 2 of 8

3 CRITIQUE OF COMPREHENSIVE RISK ASSESSMENT Dr. Robinson s evaluation of Mr. Morales is seriously flawed. demonstrated in the report are as follows: The principle faults 1. Opinions Based on Speculation and Clinical Judgment. Dr. Robinson s primary error is her complete reliance on subjective clinical judgment to guide her selection of the variables she has focused on; her failure to quantitatively measure these variables; and the unguided manner in which she combines the evidence in-her-head to form her opinion. Her evaluation process does not meet current standards of practice in forensic psychology. 2. Reliability of Structured Professional Judgment. On page 22, Dr. Robinson discusses the HCR-20 4, and indicates that the structured professional judgment approach advocated by the devotees of this checklist is a reliable approach... This is pure fabrication. Neither the HCR-20 nor structured professional judgment are standardized. 5 Moreover, this checklist-approach does not meet the standards of practice in psychology 6 nor does the information resulting from this checklist constitute substantial evidence pursuant to Daubert. 7 By way of illustration, Dr. Robinson has informed us, in her own words, that she considered over 130 variables pertaining to Mr. Morales during her assessment (e.g. that he entered puberty at age 14, that he writes his siblings monthly). However, nowhere does she tell us which variables she focused on, how she measured these variables, what method she used to combine all of this information, or how she made her final decision regarding Mr. Morales violence risk potential. Rather, Dr. Robinson s methodology depends on in-her-head contemplation and her unknown and untested belief system. In short, Dr. Robinson s thought process is the method, and there is no evidence whatsoever regarding the reliability and validity of the inner workings of her mind (aka clinical judgment ). In short, the reader is forced to rely on trust me, I m the doctor. 4 The HCR-20 is not a standardized method as it has no published norms or reliable and validated decision rules. Moreover, Dr. Douglas, the leading advocate of this checklist, refuses to publish norms and valid decision rules for the HCR-20, and refuses to appear in court as an expert witness in defense of this aide memoire (personal communication, Douglas, 2011). This instrument is, at best, a checklist to be used in some non-standardized, open-ended manner. 5 A standardized assessment is one that is administered and scored in a consistent or "standard" manner. In addition, a standardized test has a published manual (e.g. LS/CMI) which clearly states (a) how the test was developed and standardized; (b) how the test is to be administered, scored and interpreted; (c) norms and cut scores; (d) the sample on which the norms and cut scores were developed; and (e) empirical evidence of the reliability and validity of the test. Neither the HCR-20 nor the practice of structured professional judgment purportedly used by Dr. Robinson meet these criteria. 6 American Psychological Association, Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology, (2011). 7 Daubert (1993) provides the generally accepted legal standard for evaluating evidence used in medicallegal evaluations such as a BPH Comprehensive Risk Assessment. Qualified evidence is that which is relevant, and rests on scientific methodology. More specifically: the evidence must be empirical; it must be reliable and valid; there must be established standards and control concerning its operation; it must have been subjected to peer review; and the theory and technique must be generally accepted by the scientific community. Page 3 of 8

4 3. Failure to Follow the Rules of Evidence. Dr. Robinson has relied on unqualified evidence that does not meet generally accepted requirements of a forensic psychological assessment (re. Daubert). Her evaluation is based on amorphous concepts derived from the vague world of the therapist (e.g. insight, remorse, projection, displacement); she fails to demonstrate an empirical relationship between violence risk and her data; she fails to use empirical rules with demonstrated reliability and validity when she draws conclusions; and her work is not transparent. 4. Unethical Behavior. Dr. Robinson s work reflects an astonishing ignorance of the scientific literature on violence risk assessment, arrogance toward the rule of law, and total disregard for scientifically-based standards of practice in forensic psychology. When viewed in the context of the American Psychological Association s Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (2011), at least five serious violations of the ethical standards that guide the work of a forensic psychologist are indicated. Perhaps most egregious is her lack of accuracy and fairness, and her failure to avoid deception. 5. Poor Use of Resources. Dr. Robinson s report reflects a poor use of time and effort as well as poor judgment. She devotes in excess of four pages articulating numerous variables of questionable relevance (e.g. psychosocial development ), and two pages focused on an inquisition that is totally subjective and without scientific merit (e.g. remorse ). She uses an enormous amount of her time and effort on irrelevant, non-measurable variables in order to produce subjective opinions that fail to meet the rules of scientific evidence. The few times she does use scientific measurement she does it in a biased and unprofessional manner (LS/CMI) or with an instrument that is subjective and unreliable (HCR-20). CRITIQUE OF MR. MORALES PAROLE PORTFOLIO Mr. Morales Parole Portfolio reflects a great deal of commitment and effort over the past five years, and is indicative of a fundamental change in his thinking and behavior. The very fact that Mr. Morales had taken the time and effort to assemble this document underscores his willingness and ability to engage in the constructive actions necessary to affect change and rehabilitate himself. As reflected in his portfolio, Mr. Morales behavior over the past decade has become increasingly responsible and pro-social. The behaviors reflected in Mr. Morales portfolio support the conclusion that he has accepted society s institutions (e.g. home, family, work) and their underlying values (i.e. order, peace, security, love and affection). He expresses positive attitudes and feelings toward other people (e.g. peers, parents, siblings, children, spouse, employers). He values the positive functions of conventional activities (e.g. working, family) and values the rewards of such activities. He has begun to develop a sense of accomplishment and self-worth based on achievement in conventional pursuits and activities. Moreover, he accepts responsibility for his life crime, and he doesn t minimize or rationalize the harm he has caused because of his life crime. With the exception of his fellow inmates, Mr. Morales friends and acquaintances the people he respects and wants to spend time with (e.g. authors of Page 4 of 8

5 his support letters) are not involved in crime and do not have a history of violence or criminal activity. Moreover, his pattern of relationships within CDCR increasingly reflects self-control, mutual respect, and consideration for the feelings of others as consistently demonstrated by his absence of rules violations and his active participation in his own rehabilitation. The following features of his portfolio are noteworthy: Intensive, long-term (5 years) active participation in the 12 Step recovery process (i.e. AA & NA); Completion of numerous self-improvement courses dealing with substance abuse and addiction; Detailed relapse prevention planning; Connecting with NA/AA sponsors and others outside CDCR who have provided him with direction and support in the recovery process; Identification of NA/AA meetings he can attend in XXXXX Mexico once he is paroled to Mexico; Amends letter to the family of his victim expressing insight into his life crime, remorse for his behavior, and his commitment to change; On-going participation in educational programs culminating in completion of his GED (2012) as well as certifications in masonry and other skilled trades; On-going participation in self-help courses to improve his insight into why he joined a street gang; On-going participation in self-help courses to deal with anger management; Approved for participation in Substance Abuse Program (SAP) conducted by XXXXX; Completion of a detailed Parole Plan including housing, jobs and family support; Support letters from his brother, sisters and friends offering emotional and financial support once he is paroled. DISCUSSION During the first 10 years of Mr. Morales incarceration his behavior reflected a continuation of the immature and impulsive thinking and behavior that culminated in his Life Crime. Review of available records, notably his rules violations, indicates Mr. Morales continued to abuse drugs and alcohol after incarceration, and that he aligned himself with decidedly anti-social inmates. There is little in his record during those first 10 years to suggest he had learned from his mistakes or was attempting to actively engage in his own rehabilitation. As a result, his Placement Score went from 69 points at the time of his incarceration (age 19), to a high of 89 points on 1999 (age 29). This continuous upward trend of custody points is the pattern displayed by chronic offenders, career criminals, those with Anti-Social Personality Disorder and psychopathic characteristics as well as those with significant problems with impulse control and selfregulation. On the outside, Mr. Morales was indistinguishable from this group during his first 10 years of incarceration. Page 5 of 8

6 However, early in the second decade of his incarceration, following the death of his father and an intervention by his mother, Mr. Morales behavior abruptly changed...a change that is consistent with significant internal changes. He began to curtail immature and impulsive activities as evidenced by the absence of 115 s from June, 2000 to the present. He also began to actively participate in his own rehabilitation as evidenced by more active involvement in work, education and self-help programs as documented in his Life Prisoner Evaluations over the past 12 years. Ultimately, Mr. Morales turn-around is evidenced by a placement score that has been in continuous decline for 12 years, together with the numerous educational and self-help programs he has participated in as documented in his Parole Portfolio. Perhaps most indicative of the internal change in Mr. Morales is the dramatic decline in Rules Violation Reports for the past 10 years, together with the marked improvement in his Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) scores. TABE is a standardized test of the knowledge and skills of adults, and reflects the grade level at which an individual is functioning. Mr. Morales scores at the time he entered CDCR vs. today are presented below: Mr. Morales TABE Scores 8/30/90 12/17/10 Reading Math Language Total While it may be argued that the information contained in his Parole Portfolio (as well as what he says during an interview with a psychologist or during a parole hearing) is self-serving, superficial, and easy for Mr. Morales (or any inmate) to manipulate for his own gain, that is not the case with Rules Violations Reports or TABE scores. Both of these indices are reliable measures that are outside of the direct control of Mr. Morales, and reflect important internal changes in his thinking and behavior. The decline in Mr. Morales RVRs is indicative of internal changes that are reflected in changes of his behavior as seen by custody, and supports the conclusion that Mr. Morales has made the internal changes necessary to move beyond his immature and impulsive behavior, and has turned away from anti-social associates. The steady decline of his Placement Score over a 12 year period of time constitutes substantial evidence that he has adopted more productive, pro-social attitudes and behaviors characteristic of a responsible member of society. At the same time, the improvement in his educational scores also reflects significant internal changes necessary to improve himself which, in turn, have resulted in significant educational achievements as reflected by a standardized test administered by CDCR. Page 6 of 8

7 The totality of Mr. Morales thoughts and behaviors, as presented in his Parole Portfolio and the various documented behaviors discussed above, support the conclusion that Mr. Morales is not an unreasonable threat to society if release in the free community. Please contact me if you have any questions. Very Truly Yours, Joseph R. Nevotti, Ph.D. Licensed Psychologist California License PSY 9999 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents contains confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review, use, or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and laws governing the Practice of Psychology. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this communication. Page 7 of 8

8 Joseph R. Nevotti II, Ph.D., Q.M.E. Licensed Psychologist 2023 East Sims Way Port Townsend, WA Private Practice Forensic Psychologist 2009-Present Psychological evaluations and expert testimony regarding Competency, Diminished Capacity, Insanity, Future Dangerousness and Pre-Sentencing Evaluations for Superior Courts in Clallam, Jefferson, King, Kitsap and Pierce Counties. Qualified Medical Evaluations of workers compensation claimants in California California Department of Mental Health Contract Psychologist Forensic evaluations of Sexually Violent Predators (SVPs) using state-of-the art actuarial rating scales (e.g. STATIC-99, STABLE-2007, PCL-R) within guidelines of state law. California Department of Corrections Contract Psychologist Criminal forensic evaluations of life-term inmates being considered for parole emphasizing violence risk assessment using state-of-the art actuarial rating methods (e.g. HCR-20, LSI-R, PCL-R); Case management of extremely violent inmates at Pelican Bay State Prison and other maximum security prisons in accordance with federally mandated guidelines; Interdisciplinary treatment of emotionally disturbed inmates at all levels of care (GAF range: 25 to 80) and all levels of custody (minimum to violent anti-socials) in accordance with federal mandates; Suicide risk assessment and crisis management of severely emotionally disturbed inmates in two prison infirmaries. Forensic Psychiatric Services Contract Psychologist 2001 Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)--Completed rigorous training and certification process required by law to perform medical-legal psychiatric disability evaluations; Performed in excess of 125 medical-legal psychiatric disability evaluations in accordance with requirements of Workers Compensation Law. Nevotti Consultants Consulting Psychologist Provided psychological assessment, career counseling and performance coaching for Fortune 500 organizations. Performed 5,500+ psychological assessments, established valid, legally defensible personnel selection systems. Taught graduate level courses at The University of Texas, The University of Dallas (MBA Program), San Francisco State University, and Alliant University. Consistently rated a top instructor. EDUCATION Ph.D., Experimental Psychology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, 1973 M.A., Organizational Psychology, University of Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska, 1970 B.G.S., Psychology, Omaha University, Omaha, Nebraska, 1967 LICENSURE Licensed Psychologist in California, Massachusetts, Texas and Washington State Qualified Medical Evaluator (California). Page 8 of 8