The People v. Collins CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Collins argues the shifting of the burden of proof for release to the SVP contained

in the amended SVPA violates equal protection. In McKee I, the Supreme Court held the

SVPA is subject to equal protection analysis because it "treats SVP's significantly less

favorably than those similarly situated individuals civilly committed under other statutes"

including MDO's and NGI's. (McKee I, supra, 47 Cal.4th at pp. 1196, 1203, 1207.)

Since individuals within each of these categories "have the same interest at stake—the

loss of liberty through involuntary civil commitment—it must be the case that when

society varies the standard and burden of proof for SVP's . . . , it does so because of the

belief that the risks involved with erroneously freeing SVP's from their commitment are

The Supreme Court remanded in McKee I for an evidentiary hearing on whether disparate treatment for SVP's is justified. The court transferred "grant and hold" cases under McKee I to the Courts of Appeal with directions to vacate their prior opinions and reconsider in light of McKee I. The order expressed a desire to avoid unnecessary multiplicity of…