Curlee

People v. Curlee

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 12, 2015A136337California7,293 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rivera, J.

I. BACKGROUND

The Alameda County District Attorney filed a petition to commit Curlee as an SVP in December 2010. A supporting declaration averred Curlee had suffered a qualifying conviction, for forcible rape (Pen. Code, § 261), and that the Director of the California Department of Mental Health2 (the Department) had requested Curlee be civilly committed as an SVP based upon the evaluations of three independent mental health professionals who had determined Curlee had a diagnosed mental disorder that made him likely to engage in sexually violent, predatory criminal behavior unless he received appropriate treatment in custody. A jury trial took place, in which the People called Curlee as a witness in their case-in-chief. The jury found Curlee was an SVP, and on August 7, 2012, the trial court committed him for an indefinite term to the Department for appropriate treatment and confinement in a state hospital.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Equal Protection Curlee argues he was deprived of his constitutional right to equal protection when the District Attorney called him as a witness.3 At the time of Curlee’s commitment trial, there was case law holding that an SVP’s constitutional right to…

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.