MacAuley

People v. MacAuley

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 669·73 Cal. App. 4th 704·86 Cal. Rptr. 2d 675·99 Daily Journal DAR 7365·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5785
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 20, 1999B118285California1,674 words

Opinion

Opinion

Coffee, J.

J. — Jesus Macauley appeals from his involuntary commitment as a mentally disordered offender (MDO) under Penal Code section 2962. He argues that his conviction for arson of property did not qualify as an MDO offense at the time of his commitment, and that a recent amendment to the. MDO law, which enlarged the list of qualifying offenses to include arson of property “where the act posed a substantial danger of physical harm to others,” is an ex post facto law if applied to his case. (§ 2962, subd. (e)(2)(L), amended by Stats. 1999, ch. 16, § 1.) We disagree and affirm.

Facts

Appellant used gasoline to set fire to his wife’s automobile shortly after she filed for divorce in 1991. He was convicted of arson of property under section 451, subdivision (d), and was placed on probation.

In 1995, appellant was reportedly “stalking” his ex-wife and following her in his car. She called the police and when they contacted him to investigate, they found a toy cap gun, black gloves, a pullover mask, an imitation police badge, a .357-magnum derringer, and five bullets in the car. Appellant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm under section 12021, subdivision…

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.