P.

P. v. Johnson CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 9, 2013B239324California1,086 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Johnson filed a petition to challenge a Board of Parole Hearings determination that he met the requirements for commitment as an MDO. (§ 2962.) He waived a jury trial. At trial, Dr. Timothy Nastasi testified that Johnson suffers from pedophilia, a severe mental disorder. His pedophilia was an aggravating factor in his offense of committing lewd acts on a child. Johnson "represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others because" of his disorder. He has a "history of sexual violence," which includes "five years of sexual acts with a child between the ages of three and eight." Nastasi said, "[P]edophilia in the clinical sense never actually goes in remission. One would have to gain the skills through psychosocial treatment to be considered in remission . . . ." Johnson is not in remission. He did not complete "the sex offender program." Nastasi said that Johnson received 90 days of treatment in the year prior to his parole release date at a POC. In rendering his opinion, he relied on an MDO evaluation report by Dr. Kathryn Anderson and statements Johnson made to her during an interview. Anderson concluded that Johnson received 90 days of treatment at…

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.