Marchman

People v. Marchman

Good Law
145 Cal. App. 4th 79·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1854·2006 Daily Journal DAR 15466·51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 369·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10881
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 27, 2006C048996California4,119 words

Opinion

Opinion

Butz, J.

Defendant Darrell Keith Marchman was committed for an additional year of involuntary mental health treatment under the Mentally Disordered Offender Act (hereafter MDO Act), Penal Code section 2960 et seq. He appeals contending, inter alia, that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the recommitment petition. He asserts that, under the MDO Act, the district attorney has no authority to file a petition unless the medical director of the treating state hospital determines that the severe mental disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without treatment. This contention is meritorious and we shall reverse the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In 1989, when defendant was 19 years old, he pleaded guilty to two counts of lewd acts on a child under 14 years of age under section 288. He was sentenced to a determinate term of eight years in state prison.

In January 1994, after completing his term of imprisonment, he was committed to Atascadero State Hospital as a condition of parole pursuant to section 2962. In July of 1996 the medical director of the hospital determined that defendant met the criteria for continued involuntary…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.