Filed 2/1/22 P. Fekadu CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

BERHU HADARA FEKADU,

Defendant and Appellant.

 D078696

 (Super. Ct. No. SCD109580)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, 

Peter L. Gallagher, Judge. Affirmed. 

Barbara A. Smith, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for 

Defendant and Appellant. 

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant 

Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Steve 

Oetting and Paige B. Hazard, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and 

Respondent. 
2

Appellant Berhu Hadara Fekadu was committed to the California 

Department of State Hospitals in 1996 pursuant to Penal Code section 10261

after he was found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGI) of several criminal 

charges in 1995. He appeals an order extending his commitment for an 

additional two years—until October 3, 2022—pursuant to section 1026.5. 

Fekadu contends that there was no substantial evidence to support the trial 

court’s finding that he would pose a risk of danger to others if released. We 

disagree and affirm the order.

BACKGROUND

A. Commitment History

On December 31, 1994, Fekadu approached two 13-year-old girls who 

were standing outside of a restaurant. He grabbed one girl from behind, 

fondled her breasts, stomach and neck, and asked for a kiss. When the first 

victim pushed him away, he approached the second girl. He tried to kiss her, 

grabbed her from behind, and groped her breasts. When the girls ran inside 

the restaurant, Fekadu followed. The mother of one of the girls picked up a 

knife and told Fekadu to leave. Fekadu, who also had a knife, held it over his 

head and screamed,“ ‘Don’t come close to me. I’m God.’ ” The girls and the 

mother escaped and locked themselves in an office.

A jury found Fekadu NGI in December 1995 of two counts of lewd acts 

upon a child under the age of 14 (§ 288, subd. (b)) and three counts of assault 

with a deadly weapon likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). 

The trial court thereafter found that Fekadu had not recovered his sanity and 

committed him in 1996 to the State Department of Mental Health for 

treatment. His maximum term of commitment was set at six years and 10 

1 Further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise 

stated. 
3

months, including only periods of actual confinement. Fekadu was released 

under the conditional release program (CONREP) for community-based 

treatment in 1998, but was recommitted in 1999 after he ceased taking his 

psychotropic medication and decompensated. His commitment was 

subsequently extended eight times pursuant to section 1026.5. 

B. Current Petition for Recommitment

At the request of the medical director for the state hospital where 

Fekadu is currently committed, the People petitioned in June 2020 to again 

extend Fekadu’s commitment, which was scheduled to expire on October 3, 

2020. The medical director declared that Fekadu qualified for an extension of 

his commitment because he represents a substantial danger of physical harm 

to others by reason of his mental disease or disorder. 

The recommitment trial was delayed until 2021 due to issues related to 

the COVID-19 pandemic. Three experts testified at the bench trial. Fekadu 

testified on his own behalf. 

1. Testimony of Dr. Ana Kodzic

Dr. Kodzic is a forensic psychologist at the hospital where Fekadu is 

committed. She has evaluated Fekadu every six months since 2017. She is 

not part of his treatment team, but prepares reports approximately every two 

years regarding whether an extension of his NGI commitment is necessary. 

Fekadu is diagnosed with schizophrenia and he has presented 

symptoms consistent with that diagnosis in his interviews with Dr. Kodzic. 

He has had auditory hallucinations, grandiose delusions, paranoid delusions, 

and disorganized behavior since at least 1994. Fekadu has admitted that he 

committed the 1994 NGI crime of touching a girl because voices told him to 

do so.
4

In a February 2019 evaluation, Fekadu’s mental illness appeared to 

have become destabilized from his baseline, which Dr. Kodzic described as 

already “fairly symptomatic.” His delusions were more grandiose and 

prominent. He spoke about being persecuted and kidnapped by Italian 

missionaries and “colonizers.” He claimed to be the prime minister of 

Ethiopia and that evil entities were preventing him from performing that 

role. He stated that when he writes letters to people, they become doctors. 

He also talked about having great mastery of the Bible. Dr. Kodzic described 

his writings as disorganized. Fekadu quoted Biblical passages, but did not 

put them together in a way that made sense. 

About four months later, in June 2019, Dr. Kodzic interviewed Fekadu 

with his treatment team because Fekadu was very symptomatic with 

grandiose delusions. He talked about being an international politician, said 

that he could be a doctor, and claimed to be a miraculous healer who could 

heal doctors. He used made-up words, referred to as neologisms, which is a 

classic symptom of schizophrenia. He was agitated and emotional. Dr. 

Kodzic described him as “hyperverbal and hyperreligious.” Fekadu told his 

treatment team that “ ‘sooner or later doctors get punished and end up in 

graves.’ ” Earlier, Fekadu had handed his psychiatrist a letter that said, 

“God will smite you down” and “you are a liar and God hates liars.” Fekadu 

gave Dr. Kodzic a similar letter that was disorganized and menacing in tone. 

Fekadu has never been able to discuss how his mental illness is 

connected to his NGI offenses or how it relates to his propensity to commit 

violent or sexual offenses. At times, he maintains that he is innocent, the 

charges are fabricated, and he is being held illegally. Other times, he says 

that he touched a lady because voices told him to do so. He also says that a 

doctor told him to plead NGI because he would be hospitalized for only six 
5

months. He has never been able to successfully participate in sex offender 

treatment because he has not had the ability to recognize risk factors for 

sexual aggression or discuss such topics in a logical manner. 

Dr. Kodzic met with Fekadu in March 2020 for the most recent 

recommitment evaluation. Fekadu was still symptomatic and did not display 

appropriate insight into his mental illness. He exhibited grandiose and 

paranoid delusions. His thought organization was tangential and difficult to 

redirect, but was not disorganized. He would become so fixated on his 

delusions that it was difficult to redirect him to discuss the questions asked. 

He talked about being prevented from assuming his role as a prime minister 

of Ethiopia. He was overly focused on the sexuality of his peers and 

expressed fear that homosexual peers were going to sexually assault him, 

without any basis in fact. He perseverated on Italian and Catholic colonizers 

whom he said had somehow worked against him and his family. He 

remained hyperreligious and had grandiose ideas about God and how he fits 

within God’s plan. Fekadu maintained that he no longer had schizophrenia, 

that he had been “restored,” and that he no longer needed medication for 

either schizophrenia or for his medical conditions such as hypertension and 

allergies. 

Dr. Kodzic opined that Fekadu was “floridly psychotic” at the time he 

committed his NGI offenses. According to Dr. Kodzic, insight into his mental 

illness, such as recognizing that he has a chronic illness that does not go 

away and that medication compliance is necessary, is an important factor to

keep his symptoms in check and to prevent him from harming himself or 

others. 

When Dr. Kodzic evaluated Fekadu again in January 2021, he showed 

marginal improvement. He was not as agitated or paranoid as he was at the 
6

time of the prior evaluation. He had similar delusions and was religiously 

preoccupied, but his symptoms were toned down. He still did not have 

appropriate insight into his mental illness and did not acknowledge positive 

aspects of adhering to medication management. He adamantly asserted, “ ‘I 

don’t need psychiatric medication. It’s breaking and killing me.’ ” Fekadu 

has been prescribed several different medications for his schizophrenia with 

varying degrees of success. He has a history of medication noncompliance 

and intermittently asks to be taken off his medications, including those for 

his medical conditions. Dr. Kodzic noted that Fekadu’s refusal to take 

medication for high blood pressure and diabetes is concerning because these 

conditions can lead to significant medical complications. 

Dr. Kodzic stated that Fekadu works against his treatment team and is 

not forthcoming about his symptoms. For example, Fekadu told a staff 

member in 2018 that he was hearing the voice of an evil woman, but he did 

not want to tell his doctors because he thought they would increase his 

medications. He previously assaulted a psychiatrist, which resulted in his 

transfer to his current facility. The recent letter to his psychiatrist was 

threatening in that it said that God would punish the psychiatrist. Dr. 

Kodzic indicated that Fekadu’s belief that he is the hand of God raises the 

concern that Fekadu would act aggressively in the future, particularly if he 

heard a voice that he believed to be God’s. 

Fekadu engaged in violent acts in 1995, 2011, 2014, 2015, and 2017. 

He also behaved in a sexually inappropriate manner toward his psychologist 

and had a few indecent exposure incidents in 2015. Dr. Kodzic took these 
7

incidents into account in her evaluation of whether Fekadu could control his 

dangerous behavior if released.2 

In Dr. Kodzic’s opinion, Fekadu’s mental disorder is not in remission 

and he represents a danger of physical harm to others. She explained that 

even in a highly controlled hospital environment where he is on psychotropic 

medications, he has a hard time managing his behavior effectively. Although 

he has not engaged in physical altercations or acted out sexually in some 

time, he recently wrote threatening letters to his care providers. He 

continues to be delusional and said that he would stop taking his 

psychotropic medications if released. He believes that he can use coping 

skills such as reading the Bible, journaling, and praying to ensure that he 

does not harm others.3

Fekadu’s discharge plans are not reasonable. He plans to return to 

Ethiopia and become a prime minister to “bring theocracy and democracy to 

Ethiopia.” He has no support in the community and has had no recent 

contact with family members. 

Given how symptomatic Fekadu is in a controlled environment, Dr. 

Kodzic believed that he would decompensate under his paranoid and 

2 On cross-examination, Dr. Kodzic discussed an incident that occurred 

in June 2017 when Fekadu had physical contact with another patient. Dr. 

Kodzic acknowledged that if another patient initiated physical contact, it 

would be reasonable for Fekadu to defend himself. 

3 Fekadu does sing, pray, and write to self-soothe when he feels agitated. 

However, Dr. Kodzic thought that his statements about using those 

strategies as coping mechanisms is a learned response and not a true 

expression of how he could use such skills to manage his psychiatric 

symptoms if released. He does not understand his symptomology or the need 

to cope. Because he does not think that he has a mental illness, he does not 

use appropriate coping skills to manage that illness. 
8

grandiose delusions if he were released to the community and stopped taking 

his medications, as he indicated he would do. She believed that Fekadu’s

auditory hallucinations would reemerge and that his inhibitions would be 

lowered without medications. This would place him at increased risk of 

engaging in aggressive behavior, committing another crime, and harming 

himself or others. In Dr. Kodzic’s opinion, Fekadu meets the criteria for 

recommitment. 

2. Testimony of Dr. Nicole Friedman

Dr. Friedman, a court-appointed psychologist, evaluated Fekadu in 

2020 and reviewed his records from CONREP, the state hospital, and his 

criminal record history. She previously evaluated Fekadu in 2014. She 

relied on both her evaluation and his records to form her opinions. 

Fekadu exhibited delusions, including grandiose delusions, and 

agitation during Dr. Friedman’s 2020 evaluation. He lacked insight into his 

mental illness. He did not believe that he has a mental illness or that he 

needs medications. 

Fekadu acknowledged that he is being treated for schizophrenia and 

delusions and understood that he is required to take medications pursuant to 

an involuntary medication order. However, he disagrees that he has a 

mental illness and does not think that medications are helpful. He believes 

that he has been mistreated while in a hospital setting and that his 

treatment has been abusive. He said that he has faith in a higher power and

that he uses prayer, meditation, and journaling to heal himself. He takes his 

psychotropic medication under the involuntary medication order. However, 

he has asked to change his dosage because he believes that he was being 

poisoned. He has refused his medications for medical conditions such as 
9

diabetes and hypertension. Dr. Friedman believed that Fekadu would not 

take his psychotropic medications without an involuntary medication order.

Fekadu’s thought process was coherent and logical at one point in the 

interview but later became disorganized, convoluted, and tangential. His 

discharge plans initially sounded reasonable; he wanted to return to his 

family in his country of origin. However, other portions of his plan sounded 

delusional. He said that his family was caged, that they can come back to 

life, and that his mother was waiting for him in a cage on their property. He 

went onto say that he is a prophet who has been studying the Bible for over 

20 years. Later, he said that he thought perhaps he could transfer to a 

different level of care, which sounded less delusional. 

Dr. Friedman opined that Fekadu has active symptoms of 

schizophrenia, which is a chronic and severe mental illness, and that his 

illness is not controlled by his psychotropic medications. Fekadu does not 

understand his commitment offenses or the role that his mental illness 

played in those offenses. As a result, he has difficulty controlling his 

dangerous behavior.

Dr. Friedman agreed that Fekadu had not exhibited physical 

aggression or increased anxiety in the last two years to the extent that he 

required additional medication that is prescribed for use on an as-needed 

basis to control symptoms that are not sufficiently controlled by the patient’s 

usual medications. She agreed that he is at low risk for dangerous behavior 

to others while in a controlled institutional setting where his mental illness is 

well cared for. However, Fekadu’s writings reflect aggressive thoughts, 

which could be a warning sign of later physical violence. 

In Dr. Friedman’s opinion, Fekadu lacks insight and is unable to 

manage his mental illness with psychosocial support, his own awareness, 
10

coping skills, or the use of medication. He was not able to provide an 

appropriate discharge plan for himself. His lack of insight about his mental 

disease is concerning because it hinders his ability to care for himself by 

participating in treatment or trusting someone of authority who tells him 

that his mental disease is affecting his perception of reality. 

Dr. Friedman believed that Fekadu’s delusions put him at an increased

risk of posing a danger to others because he is not in touch with reality, his 

disorder is not in remission, and his criminal history shows that his mental 

illness can cause him to behave in an aggressive manner and to act 

inappropriately. The fact that Fekadu is on an involuntary medication order 

shows that he does not consistently demonstrate the ability or motivation to 

take his psychotropic medications, which help abate his symptoms. If he 

were released, Dr. Friedman believed that it was unlikely that he would take 

his medications or seek proper treatment for his mental disorder, and that he 

would decompensate without such treatment. She believed that he should be 

recommitted. 

3. Testimony of Dr. G. Preston Sims

Dr. Sims is a clinical and forensic psychologist and a sexually violent 

predator evaluator for the Department of State Hospitals. He evaluated 

Fekadu in November 2020, reviewed Fekadu’s records from October 2018 to 

January 2021, and also reviewed his criminal record. 

Although Fekadu was cooperative during the evaluation, his speech 

was disorganized, he changed subjects frequently, and it was difficult to 

follow his logic. He made bizarre statements, including that he talks to his 

children telepathically. Dr. Sims believed that this was current evidence of 

auditory hallucinations. Fekadu also showed symptoms of persecutory, 

grandiose, and religious delusions. 
11

Fekadu did not display insight into his mental illness. He denied being 

mentally ill. He said that he has been wrongfully held at the state hospital, 

does not need medication, and that the hospital staff are trying to poison or 

kill him. Fekadu made contradictory statements, saying that he disagreed 

that he has delusions and then saying, “I had delusions, but they’re in 

remission.” 

Dr. Sims believed that Fekadu meets the criteria for an extension of his 

NGI commitment. He agreed with Fekadu’s diagnosis of schizophrenia, 

which is a severe mental disorder. The condition is not in remission. 

Dr. Sims stated that psychological literature correlates insight with the 

risk of future violence. When patients understand their mental illness, their 

treatment goes more smoothly. They take their medication, they are more 

likely to attend group therapy, and their daily interactions are easier.

Fekadu did not demonstrate an understanding of the role his mental 

illness played in his NGI offense. He said that only one female was involved 

and that he touched her breasts as she was running. He denied having a 

knife. He claimed that the police had made a false report and said that he 

was suing them for $50 million. 

Dr. Sims believed that Fekadu represents a substantial danger of 

physical harm to others. In forming this opinion, he evaluated Fekadu with a 

widely-recognized risk assessment tool known as the Historical Clinical Risk 

Management 20 (HCR-20). This actuarial risk assessment tool rates an 

individual on 20 factors “that the psychological literature has shown to 

correlate with violent recidivism.” These include historical, clinical, and 

future risk factors. Fekadu had 12 out of 20 factors, indicating that he is at 

high risk for engaging in future violence.
12

Fekadu had three of 10 historical risk factors. These include engaging 

in violence, suffering from a major mental disorder, and having problems 

with treatment or supervision response. The persecutory delusions caused by 

his mental disorder, in particular, place him at an increased risk of engaging 

in violent behavior. 

Fekadu had four of five clinical factors placing him at risk of future 

violence. These include a lack of understanding about why his medications 

are necessary to treat a mental illness, recent symptoms including 

persecutory delusions, and problems with instability, meaning a lack of 

consistent emotional expression across time. He becomes argumentative and 

defensive and sometimes does not respond well when contacted by staff 

members. The fourth factor is his involuntary medication order and his 

recent refusal to take his medications. 

Dr. Sims also believed that Fekadu had all five future risk factors for 

violence. These include future problems with cooperating with professional 

services and plans, difficulty living in an unstructured environment, lack of 

family support, future problems with treatment, and future problems with 

stress or coping. 

Even without considering the results from the assessment tool, Dr. 

Sims believed that Fekadu posed a danger to others in the community in 

view of his denial of his diagnosis and symptoms, his belief that he does not 

need medications, and his history of becoming aggressive with little 

provocation. Based on Fekadu’s history of aggressive behavior, Dr. Sims 

believed that Fekadu would have serious difficulty controlling his dangerous 

behavior if he were to be released and were not medicated. Dr. Sims thought 

that it was significant that most of the incidents of aggressive behavior had 

occurred while Fekadu was in custody or in a state hospital setting 
13

undergoing treatment and receiving medication. Dr. Sims did not believe 

that Fekadu would take his psychotropic medications in an unstructured 

setting, which would further contribute to his serious difficulty in controlling 

his dangerous behavior. Dr. Sims noted that the incidents of aggressive 

behavior occurred when Fekadu misperceived someone as behaving 

aggressively toward him and would react with aggression. 

Dr. Sims was of the view that Fekadu should be recommitted because 

he has a severe mental disorder, he represents a substantial danger to others

by reason of this mental disorder, and he has serious difficulty controlling his 

dangerous behavior. 

4. Testimony of Fekadu

Fekadu testified that he believed he was ready for release from the 

hospital. He stated that there were four churches where he could go for help 

and that he also has family members who would be available to transport 

him from the hospital to one of the four churches in San Diego. He believed 

that he could go to the church where he was baptized and that they would 

provide him with a room and food. He said that he could finish a computer 

degree and then become a professor at San Diego City College. Thereafter, 

he planned to go to Ethiopia. 

Fekadu said that he would not seek psychiatric treatment and would 

not take psychiatric medication if released. He stated,“[A]ll I need is 

church.” He said that he will need to use his coping skills “forever,” to handle 

stress or frustration and described his coping skills as prayers, meditation, 

reading, writing, journaling, exercising, phoning, watching television, and 

listening to music. If he were to experience agitation in public, he would 

kneel down and pray or go home to pray for God’s peace. Writing down his 

frustrations would also help. He maintained that he would not act out. 
14

Although he initially said that he had learned these skills from hospital 

classes, he later said that he had come up with most of them himself. 

Fekadu explained that he does not want to take medications because 

they cause physical side effects. He believes that the medications have

impaired his eyesight and that they cause swelling, vomiting, constipation, 

and tremors in his hands. 

Fekadu testified that only psychiatrists frustrate him. He denied that 

he would harm a psychiatrist, but believed that God would do so based on 

Bible passages. He believes that the passages indicate that he has the divine 

power of the Holy Spirit and that he is a prophet. He said that when people 

“go against prophets . . . they will die.” He denied that he has a mental 

illness saying, “If I say I have mental illness, it’s a disgrace to the almighty 

and intelligence–infinite intelligence of God.”

5. Court’s Ruling

After considering the evidence, the court concluded that Fekadu met 

the criteria for recommitment for two additional years. Based on the 

opinions of the experts as well as Fekadu’s testimony that he would not take 

his psychotropic medications if released, the court determined that he has a 

serious, severe mental disorder and that he poses a substantial danger of 

physical harm to others by reason of that disorder because he has serious 

difficulty controlling his dangerous behaviors.

DISCUSSION

A. General Legal Principles

A defendant who is found NGI may be confined to a state psychiatric 

hospital for a period as long as the maximum amount of time for which the 

defendant could have been imprisoned if he or she had been found guilty of 

the charged offense(s). (§§ 1026, 1026.5, subd. (a)(1).) However, the district 
15

attorney may petition the superior court to extend the commitment of a 

patient if the patient represents a substantial risk of physical harm to others 

because of a mental disease, defect, or disorder. (§ 1026.5, subd. (b)(2).) 

Establishing that an NGI defendant poses a substantial danger of 

physical harm to others “requires proof that the person has serious difficulty 

controlling his dangerous behavior.” (People v. Williams (2015) 242 

Cal.App.4th 861, 872 (Williams).) The factors required for an extended

commitment must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. (Ibid.; see § 1026.5, 

subd. (b)(7).) 

The person may defend against the extension by proving by a 

preponderance of evidence that medication effectively controls his mental 

illness and that he will take his medication without fail in a completely 

unsupervised environment. (People v. Bolden (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 1591, 

1602 (Bolden).) 

“We review an order to extend commitment under section 1026.5 by 

applying the substantial evidence test, examining the entire record in the 

light most favorable to the order to determine whether a rational trier of fact 

could have found the requirements of the statute satisfied beyond a 

reasonable doubt. (Williams, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th at p. 872.) 

B. Application

Fekadu admits that he was still experiencing symptoms of 

schizophrenia at the time of the recommitment hearing, but contends that 

the court lacked substantial evidence to find that he presented a danger to 

himself or others because he had not acted out physically since 2016.

Although Fekadu has not acted out recently, he did engage in an 

altercation, either by mutual combat or as self-defense, in 2017 and he has 

written threatening and menacing letters since that time. We conclude that 
16

there is other substantial evidence to support the court’s determination that 

Fekadu represented a substantial danger to others. 

The court considered, and was entitled to rely upon, the testimony of 

the three psychologists, including the results of the risk assessment tool used 

by Dr. Sims. (Williams, supra, 242 Cal.App.4th at p. 872 [“A single 

psychiatric opinion that a person is dangerous because of a mental disorder

constitutes substantial evidence to justify the extension of commitment.”].) 

Each expressed the opinion that Fekadu would pose a substantial danger to 

others if released. They based their opinions not simply on his NGI offenses 

or past aggressive behavior, but also on his complete lack of insight into his 

mental illness and his stated intention to stop taking his prescribed 

psychotropic medications if released. Fekadu confirmed in his testimony that 

he does not believe that he has a mental illness and that he would not take 

medication if released. 

The court noted that Fekadu becomes irritable when chastised, he is 

paranoid about the intentions of others, he verbalizes antisocial intent 

toward others of different ethnicities or gender, and he has engaged in 

instances of dangerous behavior even in an institutional setting as recently 

as 2017. Dr. Friedman said that Fekadu’s illness can cause him to act 

aggressively or make threats of revenge or retaliation toward his treatment 

team based on persecutory ideas. Dr. Sims stated that Fekadu becomes 

argumentative and defensive when contacted by staff members.

Dr. Kodzic and Dr. Sims both commented that Fekadu’s NGI crimes 

were driven by command auditory hallucinations. Without medications to 

manage those auditory hallucinations or “voices,” they would become more 

prominent and would compound Fekadu’s persecutorial and grandiose 
17

delusions, which would increase the risk of aggression, particularly if he 

believed that he was hearing the voice of God. 

Without insight into his mental illness and continued use of medication

in a controlled setting, all three experts believed that Fekadu would 

decompensate psychologically to the point that he would have difficulty 

controlling behavior that is dangerous to others, particularly when faced with 

environmental stressors. All three experts believed that Fekadu would pose 

a substantial risk of danger to others if released.

These are not speculative opinions, as Fekadu suggests. These are 

opinions based on the experience and training of the psychologists and are 

grounded in fact, based on Fekadu’s statements and his documented mental 

health history. “In the context of a petition for an extension of commitment 

under section 1026.5, subdivision (b), a finding on whether the individual is 

dangerous to others because of mental illness is essential. Testimony by 

mental health experts in this context will often be the only way to establish 

whether such dangerousness exists.” (People v. Bennett (1982) 131

Cal.App.3d 488, 497.) “A mental health professional’s opinion on an 

individual’s dangerousness ‘includes a significant contemporary component. 

It speaks . . . to the present proclivities of the individual; it says that he is at 

this moment fully capable of conduct dangerous to the health and safety of 

others . . . .’ ” (Ibid.) Mental health professionals “are routinely called upon 

to make assessments of present dangerousness,” as they were here.4 

People v. Esparza (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 726, cited by Fekadu, does 

not assist him. That case involved a denial of a request for resentencing as a 

second strike offender under section 1170.126 because the trial court was not 

4 Fekadu has not challenged the qualifications of the experts to make 

these determinations, either at trial or on appeal. 
18

willing to determine that the defendant did not pose a danger to the 

community. (Id. at pp. 732–734.) Although the court commented that the 

defendant’s prison record was “ ‘the most stellar’ the court had seen,” the 

court was concerned about the defendant’s lengthy criminal history, which 

involved numerous convictions for driving under the influence, and inferred 

that the defendant’s commitment to Alcoholics Anonymous meetings was 

insincere because he had been in prison for 16 years and had only recently 

started attending meetings after a change in the law. (Id. at pp. 733–734.) 

The appellate court reversed, concluding that there was no substantial 

evidence to support the court’s findings because the prosecution did not meet 

its burden on the issue of the defendant’s sincerity. The record showed that

the defendant had been attending AA meetings for two years, rather than six 

months as the trial court found, and the new law was passed after he began 

attending those meetings. The appellate court stated that the trial court’s 

analysis “became disconnected from the evidence presented” and for that 

reason, remanded the case for further proceedings. (Id. at pp. 744–745, 748.) 

In contrast, the trial court’s decision here to extend Fekadu’s NGI 

commitment was not based solely on his criminal history or on an assessment 

of his sincerity. Rather, the court’s findings are firmly supported by the 

considered opinions of the health care professionals that Fekadu poses a 

current substantial danger of harm to others based on his mental disorder,

and by Fekadu’s trial testimony. 

For these reasons, we conclude that there is substantial evidence to 

support the court’s findings that Fekadu poses a substantial danger of harm 

to others and that he would have difficulty controlling his dangerous 

behaviors. 
19

DISPOSITION

The order extending Fekadu’s commitment to October 3, 2022, is 

affirmed. 

AARON, J.

WE CONCUR:

HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

HALLER, J.