Hernandez

People v. Hernandez

Good Law
133 Cal. Rptr. 3d 817·201 Cal. App. 4th 483·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1508·11 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 14
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 2, 2011No. F060971California2,562 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Detjen, J.

This is an. appeal from an order for recommitment of a mentally disordered offender pursuant to Penal Code sections 2970 and 2972. 1 Appellant Daniel Hernandez contends the district attorney did not have statutory authority to file a petition under section 2970 for continued involuntary treatment because the medical director did not recommend recommitment and did not find him to be dangerous. We hold that the district attorney’s statutory authority to file a petition under section 2970 is not conditioned on a finding by the medical director that the prisoner is dangerous or on a recommendation by the medical director for recommitment.

Appellant further asserts the petition was defective on its face, and the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict on the petition. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we reject these contentions.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Upon his release from prison in 2008, appellant was committed, as a condition of parole, as a mentally disordered offender (MDO). (See § 2962.) He was placed at Atascadero State Hospital. In February 2010, a forensic psychologist evaluated him. As a result…

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.