Opinion ID: 2631933
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: svpa procedures

Text: (2) The SVPA targets a select group of convicted sex offenders whose mental disorders predispose them to commit sexually violent acts if released following punishment for their crimes. ( Hubbart v. Superior Court (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1138, 1143-1144 [81 Cal.Rptr.2d 492, 969 P.2d 584] ( Hubbart ).) The Act confines and treats such persons until their dangerous disorders recede and they no longer pose a societal threat. SVP trials are `special proceedings of a civil nature,' wholly unrelated to any criminal case. ( People v. Yartz (2005) 37 Cal.4th 529, 535 [36 Cal.Rptr.3d 328, 123 P.3d 604].) They are not punitive in purpose or effect. ( Hubbart, supra, at pp. 1144 & fn. 5, 1170-1179.) (3) Commitment depends upon whether the person is found to be an SVPa finding that ensures the Act applies to only the most dangerous offenders. ( People v. Hurtado (2002) 28 Cal.4th 1179, 1187 [124 Cal.Rptr.2d 186, 52 P.3d 116] ( Hurtado ).) When defendant's recommitment proceeding began in the trial court, an SVP was defined as someone who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against two or more victims 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. (Former § 6600, subd. (a)(1), as amended by Stats. 2000, ch. 643, § 1.) [10] (4) A `[s]exually violent offense consists of certain enumerated crimes committed by force, violence, duress, menace, fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, or threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim or any other person . . . . (§ 6600, subd. (b).) (5) In addition, a `[d]iagnosed mental disorder' refers to 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); see People v. Williams (2003) 31 Cal.4th 757, 774 [3 Cal.Rptr.3d 684, 74 P.3d 779] [such disorder requires serious difficulty controlling behavior].) We have made clear that a person is predisposed and likely to reoffend as an SVP if, because of a current mental disorder making it difficult to restrain sexually violent behavior, he presents a substantial danger, that is, a serious and well-founded risk that he will commit such crimes if released. ( People v. Superior Court ( Ghilotti ) (2002) 27 Cal.4th 888, 922 [119 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 44 P.3d 949], italics omitted.) This sexually violent criminal behavior must be predatory ( Hurtado, supra, 28 Cal.4th 1179, 1186), which includes acts targeting strangers (§ 6600, subd. (e)). (6) The process for determining whether a convicted sex offender meets these standards occurs in several stages, and ensures a seamless transition from prison to a secure treatment facility if commitment occurs. First, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation screens inmates at least six months before their scheduled release from prison, and refers those likely to be SVP's to the DMH for full mental evaluations. (§ 6601, subds. (a)(1) & (b).) Where two evaluators agree that the inmate is an SVP, the Director of Mental Health transmits a request for a petition for commitment to the county in which the inmate was convicted of the offense for which he is imprisoned. (§ 6601, subds. (d), (h) & (i).) If the county's SVP counsel (either the district attorney or county counsel, as designated by the county board of supervisors) concurs with the recommendation, a petition for commitment is filed in the trial court. ( Id., subd. (i).) (7) The trial court then determines whether there is probable cause to believe that the defendant is likely to engage in sexually violent predatory criminal behavior upon release. (§ 6602, subd. (a); see § 6601.5.) While such hearing is underway, the defendant must remain in custody. (§ 6602, subd. (a).) If probable cause is found, the judge shall order that the person remain in custody in a secure facility until a trial is completed and shall order that a trial be conducted . . . to determine whether he meets the statutory definition of an SVP. ( Ibid. ) The term secure facility, as used in the probable cause statute and elsewhere in the Act, has a particularized meaning. ( Hubbart, supra, 19 Cal.4th 1138, 1147, fn. 11.) The definition excludes most state hospitals by name or description, and refers to a facility dedicated to the housing and treatment of SVP's. (§ 6600.05.) [11] (8) At trial, the following statutory protections apply: [The defendant] shall be entitled to a trial by jury, to the assistance of counsel, to the right to retain experts or professional persons to perform an examination on his or her behalf, and to have access to all relevant medical and psychological records and reports. In the case of a person who is indigent, the court shall appoint counsel to assist him or her, and, upon the person's request, assist the person in obtaining an expert or professional person to perform an examination or participate in the trial on the person's behalf. (§ 6603, subd. (a).) In addition, the trier of fact is required to determine whether the defendant is an SVP beyond a reasonable doubt. (§ 6604.) Any jury verdict on the issue must be unanimous. (§ 6603, subd. (f).) (9) Regarding evidence admitted at trial, prior crimes play a limited role in the SVP determination. ( Hubbart, supra, 19 Cal.4th 1138, 1145.) Conviction of one or more [sexually violent offenses] shall constitute evidence that may support a court or jury determination that a person is a sexually violent predator, but shall not be the sole basis for the determination. (§ 6600, subd. (a)(3).) Within certain limits, documentary evidence may be used to prove relevant circumstances surrounding such an offense. ( Ibid.; see People v. Otto (2001) 26 Cal.4th 200, 210-211 [109 Cal.Rptr.2d 327, 26 P.3d 1061] ( Otto ) [requiring victim hearsay statements to contain special indicia of reliability where used to establish predicate offenses or support expert opinion].) To ensure commitment under proper standards, [j]urors shall be admonished that they may not find a person a sexually violent predator based on prior offenses absent relevant evidence of a currently 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, subd. (a)(3).) (10) Adjudication as an SVP entails confinement and appropriate treatment in a secure facility (§ 6604) within the meaning of section 6600.05. When the present proceeding began in the trial court, such persons were committed for two years. (Former § 6604, as amended by Stats. 2000, ch. 420, § 3.) Under the same version of the law, any subsequent extended commitment was also for two years. (Former § 6604.1, subd. (a), as amended by Stats. 2000, ch. 420, § 4.) As noted, statutory changes affecting the length of the term have since occurred. (See, ante, fn. 7.) Various posttrial provisions, which we discuss further below, require ongoing evaluation of the SVP in custody, and ensure that involuntary commitment does not continue if his mental condition materially improves. (See §§ 6605, 6608.) (11) Finally, the secure nature of confinement under the SVPA does not negate its therapeutic features. The DMH shall afford the person with treatment for his or her diagnosed mental disorder. (§ 6606, subd. (a).) This treatment obligation exists even where the person resists ( id., subds. (a) & (e)), [12] and where treatment has only a low chance of success in the particular case (§ 6606, subd. (b)). [13] The program must meet current institutional standards for the treatment of sex offenders, and must follow a structured treatment protocol developed by the DMH. (§ 6606, subd. (c).) The outline of the protocol appears in the Act. [14]