Richard DiCarlo v. State of Rhode Island

Citations

• 212 A.3d 1191

Syllabus

The petitioner, Richard DiCarlo, appealed a Superior Court judgment in favor of the state, following a written decision denying the petitioner's appeal from a decision of a Drug Court magistrate upholding a determination by the Sex Offender Board of Review classifying him as a Level II, moderate-risk, sex offender. On appeal, the petitioner argues that, in determining his classification level, the board violated his rights to due process, to the presumption of innocence, and to be spared from double jeopardy, by relying on alleged impermissible hearsay allegations that were the basis for charges of which he was ultimately acquitted. The Supreme Court held that, because the petitioner did not raise his procedural due process argument before the magistrate and failed to provide any meaningful legal argument to the Superior Court, the petitioner failed to preserve the issue for appellate review. The Court further held that the exception to the \raise-or-waive\ rule when an alleged error implicates an issue of constitutional dimension did not apply. Next, the Court held that, because sex-offender registration is a civil regulatory process, the board's actions were not in the context of a criminal trial and, thus, did not implicate the petitioner's right to a fair trial or violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court.