Field
People v. Field
Opinion
Opinion
Huffman, J.
Martin Field was committed to a mental hospital after a jury found he was a sexually violent predator (SVP) under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.; SVPA or the Act). Field appeals, contending (1) the court prejudicially erred by failing to provide a certain pinpoint jury instruction; (2) the repeated use of the term “sexually violent predator” during trial violated his due process rights; (3) the court prejudicially erred in failing to properly instruct the jury regarding the meaning of the word “likely”; (4) cumulative error requires reversal; (5) the SVPA violates the equal protection, double jeopardy, due process, and ex post facto clauses of the federal Constitution; and (6) his equal protection rights under the state and federal Constitutions were violated when the court permitted the district attorney to call Field as a witness over his objection. Regarding Field’s last contention, he argues that because a person found not guilty of crimes by reason of insanity (NGI) may not be compelled to testify at hearings to extend his or her commitment, neither should a person found to be an SVP be compelled to testify.