Crosswhite

People v. Crosswhite

Good Law
101 Cal. App. 4th 494·124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 301·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4530·2002 Daily Journal DAR 9689·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7748
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2002C037863California4,582 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

Defendant John Douglas Crosswhite appeals from an order extending his commitment to the state hospital pursuant to Penal Code section 1026.5, which authorizes, under specified conditions, extended commitment of a person found not guilty of a felony by reason of insanity (§ 1026), beyond the maximum term of commitment to which the person could have been sentenced for the underlying offense. Defendant contends section 1026.5, subdivision (b)(8) violates his due process and equal protection rights by excluding time spent on outpatient status from the maximum term of commitment. We shall conclude section 1026.5, subdivision (b)(8) does not violate due process or equal protection. We shall also reject defendant’s alternative argument that there was insufficient evidence that he continued to pose a substantial danger of physical harm to others so as to support his extended commitment. We shall accordingly affirm the judgment (order).

Background

On September 2, 1980, defendant was charged with assault with intent to commit murder (former § 217) and assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer by means likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (b)) and was accused…

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.