People v. Superior Court (Preciado)

Good Law
105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 159·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 208·2001 Daily Journal DAR 2765·87 Cal. App. 4th 1122
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 19, 2001D036024California3,144 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benke, J.

In this case we find that although a petition alleging that a person is a sexually violent predator (SVP) within the meaning of the Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA or Act) (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.) should not be filed until two psychotherapists have evaluated the alleged SVP and found that his condition meets the requirements of the Act, a failure to do so may be cured by the People after the petition is filed. Thus, in this case, where the People’s petition was timely and the required evaluations were performed prior to the end of the alleged SVP’s previous commitment, the trial court erred in dismissing the petition.

Facts and Procedural History

In 1980 real party in interest Antonio Olguin Preciado was convicted of three counts of forcible rape while using a deadly weapon, one count of attempted rape, and two counts of forcible oral copulation. He was sentenced to 33 years in prison.

In June 1997, prior to his release from prison, the People filed a petition to compel Preciado’s involuntary commitment for treatment as an SVP. On January 12, 1998, a jury found Preciado was an SVP within the meaning of section 6600. Pursuant to the terms of section…

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.