McRoberts

People v. McRoberts

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 3d 115·178 Cal. App. 4th 1249
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 2, 2009C060485California3,295 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nicholson, J.

Shortly before the scheduled parole date of defendant Daniel McRoberts, the district attorney filed a petition for his civil commitment as a person coming within the provisions of the Sexually Violent Predator Act, or SVPA (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq. [undesignated section references are to this code]). A jury sustained the petition. Following its denial of defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment or for acquittal (which asserted his juvenile adjudication was not a qualifying offense under the SVPA because it was not sexually violent), the trial court ordered his commitment to Atascadero State Hospital for an indeterminate term of treatment and confinement.

On appeal, defendant renews his challenge to the status of his juvenile adjudication as a qualifying offense, contends the trial court abused its discretion in excluding the testimony of his lay witnesses, and argues that the court erred in refusing his request for an instruction requiring the jury to find it was necessary to keep him in a secure facility for the protection of the health and safety of others. We affirm.

FACTS

Defendant, bom in August 1983, committed his first offense in May 1998. A girl whom…

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.