Sokolsky

People v. Sokolsky

Good Law
182 Cal. App. 4th 1568
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 1, 2010B212437California3,278 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mark Sokolsky appeals from a jury verdict adjudicating him a sexually violent predator under Welfare and Institutions Code section 6600 et seq. (Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA)). [1] Appellant argues he is entitled to a hearing on his right to represent himself in propria persona in this court. He also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence of his risk of reoffending, and contends that his involuntary commitment violates his due process rights. Appellant asserts that the Static-99 test employed by the psychological evaluators should not have been admitted without an evidentiary hearing under People v. Kelly (1976) 17 Cal.3d 24 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 144 , 549 P.2d 1240 ] ( Kelly ). Respondent contends that the two-year commitment imposed was unauthorized under Proposition 83.

In the published portion of this opinion we conclude appellant has no right to self-representation on appeal and that summary denial of his application was not an abuse of discretion. We decline appellant's renewed request to represent himself made at oral argument. We also agree with respondent that the proper term of commitment was indeterminate and modify the term of commitment on that…

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.