In Re Howard N.

Good Law
10 Cal. Rptr. 3d 44·116 Cal. App. 4th 373
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 12, 2004F043006California3,494 words

Opinion

Opinion

Howard N.'s commitment to the California Youth Authority (CYA) for lewd and lascivious conduct with a child under the age of 14 (Pen.Code, § 288) was extended for an additional two years pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 1800 et seq. [1]

Howard contends his commitment violated his constitutional right to due process and equal protection. (U.S. Const., 14th Amend.) He supports his argument with recent appellate decisions that have been rendered primarily as a result of legislation enacting statutory schemes to detain and treat offenders identified as sexually violent predators (SVP's). These decisions clarified the constitutional boundaries for civil commitment statutes. We conclude that section 1800 et seq. falls outside these boundaries and reverse the judgment committing Howard.

The juvenile court committed Howard to the CYA after he molested a three-year-old child. His maximum period of confinement was set to expire in February 2003. Pursuant to section 1800, the Kern County District Attorney filed a petition to extend Howard's confinement, and a jury trial was held.

At the trial, the People presented evidence from three female correctional…

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.