Court Opinion

ID: 9719545
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:55:46.728644+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:44:53.769932
License: Public Domain

MACK, Associate Judge,
concurring:
I concurred in our first opinion, 396 A.2d 183 (1978), because I did not construe that analysis as holding that the criminal commitment procedures of D.C.Code 1973, § 24-301 would pass muster as against a challenge on equal protection or procedural due process grounds, citing Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715, 92 S.Ct. 1845, 32 L.Ed.2d 435 (1972). I concur in the instant holding because the serious reservations that I held about the constitutionality of such procedures are erased by our choosing to mandate that an acquitee must be released from incarceration at the expiration of the maximum period of possible imprisonment for the criminal charge, subject to the government’s right to seek civil commitment.