On appeal from a Final Agency Decision of the New Jersey Department of Corrections.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Payne, J.A.D.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted October 2, 2008
Before Judges Stern, Payne and Waugh.
R.R., who was civilly committed to the State's Special Treatment Unit (STU) as a sexually violent predator, as defined by N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.26, following service of the maximum term of a sentence imposed for kidnapping*fn1 and other crimes, appeals from the denial by the Department of Corrections of his request for marital privacy and conjugal visitation. On appeal, he raises the following arguments in a pro se brief:
POINT I APPELLANT ARGUES THAT THE VISITATION RULES, REGULATIONS, POLICIES, AND PROCEDURES PROMULGATED BY THE DOC AT THE SPECIAL TREATMENT UNITS ARE EXCESSIVELY RESTRICTIVE WITHIN A CIVIL COMMITMENT FACILITY AND VIOLATE HIS RIGHT TO MARITAL PRIVACY WITH HIS LAWFUL SPOUSE.
POINT II APPELLANT ARGUES THAT A STATE AGENCY'S RELIANCE ON A CIVIL STATUTE TO DISENFRANCHISE HIM FROM HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS VIOLATES HIS 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th 13th and 14th AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
POINT III APPELLANT ARGUES THAT HE HAS A RIGHT TO MARITAL PRIVACY AND FREEDOM FROM GOVERNMENT INTRUSION.
Following our review of R.R.'s arguments in light of the record in the matter and applicable legal precedent, we affirm.
The record on appeal discloses that, after R.R. had been temporarily committed to the STU and while he was awaiting a final adjudication on the State's commitment petition, he filed a marriage application with the STU administration, which was subsequently granted. A marriage between R.R. and L.A. took place on September 17, 2004.
On May 20, 2005, R.R. requested that the Department of Corrections (DOC) grant him "marital privacy and conjugal visitation." That request was denied as unauthorized, as were ...