P.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Defendant was convicted in 1993 and 1995 of committing lewd and lascivious acts with a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)). In 2008, the Sacramento County District Attorney‟s Office filed a petition to extend defendant‟s commitment as an SVP. The petition alleged defendant‟s convictions and further alleged that two psychologists had evaluated defendant and found him to be an SVP. At trial, psychologists diagnosed defendant with two mental disorders, pedophilia and fetishism. They testified that defendant had a substantial, well-founded risk of

2 reoffending and they did not believe defendant could control his behavior. A psychologist testifying for defendant challenged the adequacy of the evaluations to predict whether defendant could control his behavior or whether he would reoffend, but conceded he had not met or evaluated defendant. The jury found the allegations in the petition to be true, and the trial court ordered defendant committed for an indefinite term as an SVP. Defendant appealed the indeterminate commitment on equal protection and due process grounds.

DISCUSSION

I Due Process Claims Defendant contends the SVPA “creates an…