Whitney

People v. Whitney

Good Law
129 Cal. App. 4th 1287·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 889·2005 Daily Journal DAR 6353·29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 218·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4660
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 2, 2005F045372California3,861 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ardaiz, J.

James Whitney appeals from an order committing him to the state Department of Mental Health (DMH) for two years as a sexually violent predator (SVP), pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 6600 et seq. He contends the trial court erred by finding that his Texas convictions constituted convictions for a “sexually violent offense” within the meaning of the SVP Act. For the reasons which follow, we will affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On October 7, 1992, Bakersfield police officers responded to a report about three hitchhikers, and discovered Whitney with two boys, 12-year-old Jonathan M. and 13-year-old James K. The ensuing investigation revealed that the boys had run away from a foster home placement the day before and had met Whitney that night. The three spent the night in some bushes along the freeway; during that time, Whitney asked each of them to take off their clothing so he could give them a massage. According to James, Whitney said he wanted to give him a massage whether James wanted it or not. James related that Whitney had him undress, then rubbed his genital area as well as other parts of his body. As a result, on January 26, 1993, Whitney was…

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.