Brandon Hommel maintains that he never molested an 8-year-old Catawba boy and that he pleaded no contest to forcible sodomy and aggravated sexual battery solely on his lawyer's advice.

The plea deal landed the Ohio man two years to serve in prison, avoiding the possibility of a trial and a life sentence.

Yet, while Hommel, 24, has no previous criminal record, he could still spend the rest of his life locked up.

Not in a penitentiary -- but in a mental institution.

He's one of six men convicted of violent sexual offenses in Roanoke County who have learned that finishing a prison term doesn't mean their confinement will end. Instead of releasing them, the Virginia Attorney General's Office has sought to have them committed.

Virginia is one of 19 states that allow prosecutors to petition to place sex offenders in a mental institution when they're released from prison. The procedure has been billed as a way to keep the worst offenders out of society -- but that standard is determined by a psychological evaluation, so even a first-time offender such as Hommel can end up a target.

The total number of civil commitment petitions in Virginia has more than doubled in the past two years, from 43 to 119, and the number of men committed to a special institution for sexually violent predators has tripled, from 16 to 49. The number will likely continue to increase as the state not only pursues more cases, but also expands the list of crimes that trigger a sexual offender evaluation. In anticipation, the state is constructing a $62 million, 300-bed facility to house them.

The attorney general's office is actively prosecuting 11 of these cases in Southwest Virginia. Five of them are in Roanoke County; only Newport News has more cases statewide.

A sixth Roanoke County defendant, Michael Wayne Brown, admitted that the state could prove he was a sexually violent predator and agreed to live under extremely restrictive supervision. When Brown left prison last month, he became one of just a handful out on conditional release.

"Statewide, lawyers are just beginning to handle these things," said Roanoke lawyer Stuart Pearson, Brown's attorney. He called the process strange, because it's based on predictions that the released convict will commit another crime. "You're punishing them based on the percentage chance that they're going to do something again in the future."

Salem lawyer Mark Claytor, attorney for Roger Allen Woods, who was convicted in 1977 of abducting and molesting an 11-year-old girl, suggested that the civil commitment law be called "the Gulag statute," a reference to the brutal prisons and labor camps of the former Soviet Union.

The law "is cloaked with civil procedural requirements, but it has all of the hallmarks of a criminal proceeding," said Roanoke lawyer Chris Kowalczuk.

Tucker Martin, spokesman for the attorney general's office, said research shows that this particular class of criminals tends to offend again, and so civil commitment is necessary to protect the public. "This is a step that you just have to take."

'Dangerous people'

A 1997 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that civil commitment is constitutional has not silenced legal and mental health professionals who are skeptical of the laws.

"There are lots of sort of residual questions about how they are administered that will continue to arise in every state that has them for some years to come," said University of Virginia law professor Richard Bonnie. "It's a novel approach and constitutionally controversial."

One of those issues will be whether the facilities that house these former prisoners are providing adequate treatment, "or is it punishment by another name?" Bonnie said.

Nationally, questions have been raised about whether treatment through civil commitment is effective, as very few committed offenders are fully discharged from the programs. Mental health experts have worried that the push to target sex offenders siphons off resources from mental illness treatment programs.

In Virginia, the Office of Sexually Violent Predator Services was created last year within the Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services.

House Majority Leader Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, said money for the program is a separate budget item that doesn't cut into funding for the mental health department.

Some critics say legislators should consider lengthening sentences for violent sexual offenses rather than civil commitment. Griffith notes that Virginia is doing both.

Last year lawmakers created a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for some sexual crimes against children and expanded the list of crimes eligible for civil commitment.

"These are pretty dangerous people, and I think they ought to be where they're at," Griffith said.

Committing violent sex offenders to the care of psychologists raises the possibility that someone will develop a treatment that works, he said.

"I'm hopeful that we'll find some cure for some of these people," Griffith said.

Griffith criticized Gov. Tim Kaine's veto last month of a bill to study whether sex offenders should have the option of volunteering for physical castration in exchange for their release from civil commitment. The technique has been shown to reduce recidivism, Griffith said.

Intrusive conditions

Of the 58 men found to be sexually violent predators by a Virginia court, 49 have been committed to the Virginia Center for Behavioral Rehabilitation in Petersburg.

On April 6, Brown, 39, became one of five out on conditional release. He returned to Bedford County under supervision of the probation and parole department. Although he's out of prison, he's by no means free.

He'll be monitored by the probation office and required to wear an electronic tracking device.

He must submit his computer for a forensic examination on request. If he starts dating, his partner must attend counseling sessions at a sex offender treatment program.

He must take a polygraph at least twice a year and also submit to tests with a penile plethysmograph, a machine that records sexual arousal while the subject is shown photographs.

He is barred from living with his widowed mother. "His mother ... minimized the seriousness of his abusing and blamed the victims for their own abuse. She cannot be counted to act as an appropriate chaperone for Mr. Brown," the recommendation reads.

Pearson said there wasn't much room for negotiation of Brown's conditions. The only point altered from the original recommendation was that Brown would not be required to live with a chaperone on top of being monitored.

It took 10 tries to find an apartment that fit the conditions of Brown's release -- for example, no location too close to a school -- and a landlord who was willing to accept a registered sex offender as a tenant, Pearson said.

The state's use of conditional release to let offenders prove they can function in society is a good thing, even if the conditions are intrusive, Bonnie said.

Striking a balance when setting those conditions so that they don't impinge on constitutional rights will be a challenge, he said.

'Scared of the jury'

Because civil commitment cases follow the rules of civil rather than criminal law, rules of evidence are different, Pearson said. Hearings become a "battle of the experts" between the psychologists hired by the prosecution and defense.

With conviction records and detailed, explicit psychological reports of the defendant's sexual histories readily available to the jury, a defense lawyer trying to prove that his client isn't a sexually violent predator faces an uphill battle. "The perception among defense lawyers is we're scared of the jury," Pearson said.

In a Roanoke County civil commitment case that went to trial April 30, the first to do so, the battle of the experts worked against Lester Nunley. The independent conclusions reached by a psychologist hired by attorney Chris Kowalczuk closely matched the conclusions reached by the attorney general's expert.

In a criminal case, Kowalczuk would not have been required to share his expert's evaluation, but in the civil commitment hearing, the assistant attorney general was able to call the defense's expert to testify on the prosecution's behalf.

Kowalczuk compared the state's maneuver to "the Boston Red Sox calling the Yankees' relief closer in the ninth inning of a World Series game." He called the process unfair and, "in my view, unconstitutional."

The jury found Nunley to be a sexually violent predator, but the judge has made no decision as to whether he should be committed. That won't be decided until July 2, after a state psychologist makes a recommendation.

The courts rely on psychologists who recommend whether a defendant should be released and craft conditions of release tailored to each individual.

In fact, most of the process is driven by psychologists' recommendations, including the decision whether to pursue commitment in the first place. Civil commitment has been discussed by politicians as a way to target the worst sexual offenders, but there isn't a standard that determines which cases go to court.

"Each case is so individual," said Assistant Attorney General Jill Ryan. "What weighs heavily is the psychological evaluations of the mental health experts and their opinions."

Hommel, who is facing civil commitment after serving two years for his first offense, demonstrates that the psychological evaluation can hold more weight than a lengthy record.

Federal authorities in Ohio have indicted Hommel on child pornography charges. The state intends to seek to have him committed regardless of what the federal authorities do. If the state is successful, and if Hommel is convicted of his federal charges, he would be institutionalized in Virginia once he finished serving his federal time.

The mother of the boy Hommel was convicted of molesting says she hopes the state locks Hommel away. "If you're going to do it once, I think that's not something you just decide not to do again."