Supreme Court of California

Reset A A Font size: Print

People v. Barrett, S180612

Following a nonjury trial in which petitioner was found suitable for civil commitment as a "mentally retarded person" who is a "danger" to herself or others, the court of appeals' decision rejecting petitioner's claims that she was denied due process and equal protection of the law insofar as the record did not show that the trial court advised her of the right to a jury, or elicited a valid waiver of that right before holding a bench trial, is affirmed, as consistent with closely related decision of this court, and given the mental competence issues addressed in Welf. & Inst. Code section 6500 proceedings as compared to other commitment scenarios, it is counsel who must make the tactical decision whether to seek or waive a jury.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 07/30/2012
  • Published 07/30/2012


  • Baxter


  • Supreme Court of California