Hull

INTRODUCTION

In these matters, the inmate petitioners were retained in custody past their

scheduled release dates in order to enable the California Department of Mental Health

(Department) to complete evaluations under the “Sexually Violent Predator Act”

(SVPA). (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 §§ 6600 et seq.) The question raised is whether such

continued custody was “unlawful” within the meaning of section 6601,

subdivision (a)(2), so that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the SVPA

cases. We conclude that petitioners were not lawfully in custody at the time the

1 All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.

2 commitment petitions were filed, and that petitioners were entitled to have those petitions

dismissed.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Because the relevant facts are not disputed, we can quickly sketch the factual

framework on which we decide these cases. Both petitioner Timm Dee Hull and

petitioner Garrett Ammon were incarcerated following convictions for offenses that

qualified them for evaluation under the SVPA. (See § 6600, subd. (b), for the list of

“sexually violent offenses.”) Petitioner Hull was due…