P.

P. v. Neiman CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 29, 2013B242387California1,206 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perren, J.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In August 2009, appellant was convicted of felony vandalism and was sentenced to two years in state prison. Prior to his release on parole, the Board of Parole

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code. Hearings (BPH) certified appellant as an MDO for treatment at Atascadero State Hospital (ASH). Appellant petitioned for a hearing under section 2966 and waived jury trial. Dr. Joe DeBruin, a forensic psychologist at ASH, opined that appellant met all the MDO criteria. Appellant has a 25-year history of mental illness, including a current diagnosis of schizophrenia. He suffers from auditory hallucinations, paranoia, and disorganized thinking. Based on his review of appellant's police report, treatment records, and prior MDO evaluations, Dr. DeBruin concluded that appellant's commitment offense was a crime of force or violence. The doctor summarized the underlying facts as follows: "Essentially [appellant] was living in a motor home next to his mother's residence and he attempted to enter her home. Apparently she had sort of a standing philosophy that when her grandchildren visited her, [appellant] was not allowed to enter her…

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.