Achrem

People v. Achrem

Bad Law
151 Cal. Rptr. 3d 915·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 57·213 Cal. App. 4th 153·2013 WL 323878
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 2013No. B236100California1,980 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Yegan, J.

Here we hold that treatment at a parole outpatient clinic (POC), as “specified” by the State Department of Mental Health (DMH), satisfies the 90-day treatment criterion for an MDO (mentally disordered offender) commitment. (Pen. Code, §§ 2962, subd. (c), 2964, subd. (a); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15, § 2570, subd. (f).) 1 Steven Achrem appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court determined he was an MDO. 2 Appellant *156 claims that he did not receive 90 days of treatment within a year of his parole or release date as required by section 2962, subdivision (c). We affirm and disapprove People v. Del Valle (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 88 [ 121 Cal.Rptr.2d 889 ] (Del Valle) and People v. Martin (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 970 [ 26 Cal.Rptr.3d 174 ] (Martin) where, in dicta, we stated that outpatient treatment cannot satisfy the 90-day treatment requirement of the MDO Act. (Pen. Code, § 2962, subd. (c).)

Procedural History

Appellant suffers from schizophrenia, a severe mental disorder, and was convicted of manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)) and sentenced to 11 years state prison in 2000. After he was released on parole, he received treatment for 90 days (Apr. 13, 2010, to July…

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.