Langhorne

Langhorne v. Superior Court

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 3d 560·179 Cal. App. 4th 225
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 16, 2009H033845, H033846, H033847, H033848California5,613 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bamattre-Manoukian, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioners William Langhorne, Ernest Vasquez, Mike Sanchez, and Arthur Robledo (hereafter collectively petitioners) have been subjected to involuntary two-year commitments under the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.). In 2006, the SVPA was amended to provide that a sexually violent predator’s term of commitment is indeterminate, rather than two years. (§§ 6604, 6604.1, subd. (a); People v. Whaley (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 779, 785-787 [ 73 Cal.Rptr.3d 133 ] (Whaley).) In 2007, during the petitioners’ most recent two-year commitment terms, the People filed motions to convert each petitioner’s commitment term to an indeterminate term. The trial court granted the motions.

In 2008, this court ruled in Whaley that a motion to convert a two-year commitment term to an indeterminate term is improper, because a person already committed as a sexually violent predator before the 2006 amendments to the SVPA is entitled to an extension hearing at which there will be a new determination of whether the person is a sexually violent predator. (Whaley, supra, 160 Cal.App.4th at p. 803 .) In response to Whaley , the People filed…

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.