Helm v. State

685 S.W.3d 416

In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of Eric HELM a/k/a Eric T. Helm a/k/a Eric Thomas Helm, Appellant,

v.STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 85477

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

OPINION FILED: DECEMBER 12, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clay County, Missouri, The Honorable David P. Chamberlain, Judge Tyler P. Coyle, Columbia, MO, for appellant.

Ashley D. Murphy, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before Division Three: Lisa White Hardwick, Presiding Judge, Karen King Mitchell, Judge and Cynthia L. Martin, Judge

Cynthia L. Martin, Judge.

Eric Helm ("Helm") appeals from the trial court’s judgment finding him to be a sexually violent predator ("SVP") and committing Helm to the custody of the Missouri Department of Mental Health. Helm asserts that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting documents from his parole file and in allowing his parole officer to testify about her supervision of Helm. Helm also claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to object to his parole officer’s opinions about. Helm’s risk to the community. Finding no error, we affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

Helm pleaded guilty to one count of sodomy in July 1993 and was sentenced to twenty-five years’ incarceration in the Missouri Department of Corrections. In anticipation of his release from the Department of Corrections, the State filed a petition alleging Helm to be an SVP pursuant to the sexually violent predator act ("SVP Act")¹ on June 29, 2017. An SVP is "any person who suffers from a mental abnormality which makes the person more likely than hot to engage in predatory acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility and who … [h]as pled guilty, or been found guilty in this state or any other jurisdiction …. of a sexually violent offense." Section 632.480(5)(a). Sodomy is a sexually violent offense. See section. 632.480(4). After a two-day trial, a jury returned a verdict finding that Helm is an SVP, and the trial court entered a judgment in accordance with the jury’s verdict. Helm does not challenge that the evidence admitted at trial supports the conclusion that he is an SVP. Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict,² that evidence was as follows:

In March 1986, Helm was alone with a nine-year-old girl ("Victim 1") in his car. Helm exposed his penis to Victim 1 and then told her to climb on his lap. Victim 1 sat on Helm’s lap, facing the same direction as Helm so that her back was against his chest. Helm touched Victim 1’s chest and asked her to touch his penis by "working it up and down." Helm then rubbed his penis on Victim 1’s genitals. Victim 1’s older sister approached the car and saw Helm zipping up his pants but did not see-Victim 1 in the ear and then went, back inside the home. Helm’s-sexual touching of Victim 1 resumed. Victim 1’s mother realized that Victim 1 was still outside, and asked Victim 1’s older sister to go outside to get her. Victim 1’s sister then saw Victim 1 in the vehicle with Helm. When police officers interviewed Helm in connection with this incident, Helm said, "young girls do turn me On sexually" and told the police that Victim 1 "does things sexual to try to turn me on." Helm explained that, when he refers to "young girls," he means girls fifteen and younger. Helm received probation for this offense.³

Almost immediately following the March 1986 offense, Helm sought mental health treatment. Helm spoke about his behavior during treatment, characterizing himself as "a timebomb, waiting to explode" and remarking that he was "getting really scared about what [he] might do" and that, "the temptations are getting stronger." Helm was ultimately discharged from the mental health treatment facility for engaging in "sexually inappropriate behavior" with women in treatment at the facility.

Six years later, in the summer of 1992, police received reports that Helm was loitering at a playground. A few days after the school year ended, Helm began spending every day at the playground and would be there from "sun-up to sundown." According to two girls, ages nine and ten, who were interviewed by police about Helm’s presence at the playground, Helm wore very short shorts with no underwear so that his genitals were exposed and spoke with children about sexual acts. When children confronted Helm about What he was wearing, Helm, acted like it was "no big deal" not to wear underwear. Helm was not convicted of any crimes in connection with this behavior.

In August 1992, Helm victimized two other girls, a six-year-old girl ("Victim 2") and a four-year-old girl ("Victim 3"). Victim 2’s mother witnessed Helm touch Victim 2’s genitals while Victim 2 was in a tent with Helm, and witnessed Victim 2 touching Helm’s genitals. Victim 2 reported to police that Helm touched her "right in the privates" and that "he wouldn’t quit." Victim 2 stated that Helm touched her genitals more than five times. On at least one of those occasions, Victim 2 was wearing a bathing suit, and Helm stuck his finger into Victim 2’s bathing suit and felt her genitals. With respect to Victim 3, Helm "pinched her on the arm, bit her on the back and touched … her privates" on four occasions. Victim 3 reported to police that she told Helm to stop, but he refused. Helm pleaded guilty to sodomy for his actions with Victim 2 and was sentenced to twenty-five years’ incarceration, but Helm was not convicted of any crimes for his actions with Victim 3.

There were no reports of Helm engaging in any sexually inappropriate behavior during the first eleven years of his incarceration. However, in 2004, Helm received a conduct violation for haring "copious amounts of inappropriate drawings" that depicted nude or partially clothed prepubescent girls in sexually explicit poses. Helm received conduct violations for possessing these types of drawings in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007.

In January 2008, Helm began attending the Missouri Sex Offender Treatment Program ("MOSOP") within the Department of Corrections.⁴ Successful completion of the MOSOP program renders an offender eligible for consideration for early release.⁵ In February 2008, Helm was once again found to have drawings of nude children in his possession. Nevertheless, Helm completed the first phase of MOSOP in May 2008. In July 2008 and March 2009, Helm once again possessed drawings of nude children. Helm eventually began the second phase of MOSOP during which participants receive treatment tailored to their individual risk factors. Each participant learns about the "sexual deviant cycle," including the participant’s triggers, how to remove themselves from a triggering situation, and how to prevent themselves from acting on their deviant sexual interest.

During the second phase, Helm was confronted by fellow offenders attending MOSOP on two occasions. A fellow offender confronted Helm about continuing to possess drawings of nude children. Helm had given another offender a cookbook, and the fellow offender found several drawings of nude females in the cookbook. During the confrontation, Helm maintained that he had tried to erase the drawings several years earlier in an attempt to reuse the paper and did not realize that the drawings were still visible on the paper. Helm later attempted to flush the drawings down the toilet. On another occasion, fellow offenders confronted Helm about "objectifying" an underage female who was on television, requiring the fellow offenders to turn the television off so that Helm would stop.

Despite these reports, Helm completed MOSOP in September 2010. In August 2012, Helm received a conditional release from prison. The Department of Corrections placed Helm on parole and sent Helm to the Kansas City Conditional Release Center, where he lived for five months while being supervised by a parole officer. Helm failed to meet several conditions of his parole, including obtaining a job and entering a sex offender treatment program, Moreover, Helm’s parole officer observed Helm loitering in a park with other sex offenders. In January 2013, while still on parole, Helm was found to have over 120 drawings of nude or partially clothed children, consistent with the drawings Helm possessed while incarcerated.

Helm’s parole was revoked in 2013, and he was returned to the Department of Corrections. In July 2017, while incarcerated and while the State’s petition in the instant case was pending, Helm was found with additional nude drawings of children.

A jury trial was held in February 2022. A certified forensic examiner and psychologist employed by the Missouri Department of Mental Health ("certified forensic examiner") testified about her SVP evaluation of Helm. The certified forensic examiner reviewed at least 5,000 pages of records relating to Helm, interviewed Helm, and evaluated Helm’s risk for reoffending based on actuarial assessment tools.⁶ The certified forensic examiner concluded based on a reasonable degree of psychological certainty that Helm suffers from a "mental abnormality,"⁷ namely pedophilic disorder, that renders him more likely than not to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence so that he must be confined to a secure facility.

During the certified forensic examiner’s testimony, the State offered twenty drawings that were confiscated from Helm during either his incarceration in the Department of Corrections or while he was at the Kansas City Conditional Release Center. Prior to offering the drawings into ev- idence and anticipating objections from Helm, the State approached the bench. The State informed the trial court that the twenty drawings it would be seeking to enter into evidence were business records that were part of either Helm’s Department of Corrections file or Helm’s probation and parole file, and that Helm admitted that he either drew the twenty drawings or that they were in his possession during a search of his belongings. Helm objected to...