Opinion ID: 2507273
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: SVP Act

Text: Before addressing the issue in the case, we first review the SVP Act. Under section 6601, subdivision (a)(1) (hereafter section 6601(a)(1)), an individual who is in custody under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections, and who is either serving a determinate prison sentence or whose parole has been revoked, may be determined by the director of the department to be a potential SVP. An SVP was defined at the time of the relevant proceedings to be a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against two or more victims [3] and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that he or she will engage in sexually violent criminal behavior. (§ 6600, former subd. (a)(1), as amended, Stats.2000, ch. 643, § 1.) When a potential SVP is identified, the director shall, at least six months prior to that individual's scheduled date for release from prison, refer the person for evaluation in accordance with this section. (§ 6601(a)(1).) When this occurs, the potential SVP is referred to two mental health evaluators, who must agree that the individual has a diagnosed mental disorder and is likely to engage in acts of sexual violence absent appropriate treatment in custody. (§ 6601, subds. (b), (d), & (i).) A `[d]iagnosed mental disorder' includes a congenital or acquired condition affecting the emotional or volitional capacity that predisposes the person to the commission of criminal sexual acts in a degree constituting the person a menace to the health and safety of others. (§ 6600, subd. (c).) Once two mental health evaluators agree that the person has a diagnosed mental disorder, and once the director has filed a petition, and the superior court has found probable cause, the individual has the right to counsel and to a jury trial. (§§ 6602, 6603; see People v. Superior Court (Ghilotti ) (2002) 27 Cal.4th 888, 902-903, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 44 P.3d 949.) Section 6601, subdivision (a)(2) (hereafter section 6601(a)(2)), provides that [a] petition may be filed under this section if the individual was in custody pursuant to his or her determinate prison term, parole revocation term, or a hold placed pursuant to section 6601.3, at the time the petition is filed. A petition shall not be dismissed on the basis of a later judicial or administrative determination that the individual's custody was unlawful, if the unlawful custody was the result of a good faith mistake of fact or law. It is the meaning of the last sentence of this subdivision that is at issue in the present case.