California Court of Appeal

Trial court's order of commitment of a defendant for an indeterminate terms that followed his waiver of a jury trial and submission upon documentary reports, plus the trial court's finding that he was a sexually violent predator within the meaning of Welfare and Institutions Code section 6604, is affirmed where: 1) defendant's due process claim is rejected as, even with the provision of an indeterminate term, the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) as a whole continues to ensure that the duration of actual commitment under an order of commitment for an indeterminate term is consistent with constitutional due process limits; 2) defendant's equal protection claim is rejected; 3) defendant's indeterminate commitment does not violate the federal constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws and double jeopardy; and 4) the SVPA does not violate the federal first amendment right to petition the court for redress of grievances.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/22/2009
• Published 10/22/2009

Judges

• ELIA, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Gordon B. Scott, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Sr. Assistant Attorney General, Gregg Zywicke and Bridget Billeter, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondent.