Louis W. Brock v. Mark Seling

Good Law
390 F.3d 1088·2004 WL 2650823·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 24279
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 22, 200402-35444California1,201 words

Opinion

Opinion

This is a habeas appeal challenging jury instructions regarding the mental condition required to support civil commitment under the Sexually Violent Predator’s Act (SVPA). Mr. Brock, civilly committed as a sexually violent predator, argues that the jury instructions supporting his commitment failed to satisfy the due process requirements detailed in Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 , 122 S.Ct. 867 , 151 L.Ed.2d 856 (2002). The State defends that (1) Brock’s due process argument was not properly exhausted in the state court nor raised in the district court and (2) the jury instructions given satisfy Crane’s requirement that a person convicted under SVPA be shown to suffer “serious difficulty” controlling dangerous behavior. We hold that the jury instructions meet Crane’s requirement despite omission of the phrase “lack of control.” The district court’s judgment denying Brock’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is AFFIRMED.

I.

A. Factual Background

A history of convictions for violent and sex-related crimes led the State of Washington to declare Mr. Brock a sexually violent predator pursuant to SVPA in 1991. See Wash. Rev.Code § 71.09.020. As he neared completion of a sentence for…

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.