<< News Scan | Main | News Scan >>


Civil Commitment of Predators and Treatment Records

| 0 Comments
The California Supreme Court decided today in People v. Superior Court (Smith), No. S225562 that the District Attorney may obtain otherwise confidential treatment records in a case of civil commitment of a "sexually violent predator."
In California, mental health professionals and law enforcement personnel endeavor to identify and treat individuals likely to engage in sexually violent criminal behavior because of a mental disorder. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§6600-6609.3, SVPA or Act; see Hubbart v. Superior Court (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1138, 1143.) Although designation as a sexually violent predator (SVP) is not a punitive measure, individuals so designated are subject to a variety of serious consequences, including civil commitment. (§ 6604.)

Whether someone qualifies as an SVP is determined by a judge or jury at a trial. (Ibid.) Key to that determination are the opinions of the mental health professionals designated by the State Department of State Hospitals (SDSH) to examine the alleged SVP and to consider, among other things, the factors known to be associated with the risk of reoffending. (§ 6601, subd. (c).) We granted review in this case to decide whether the district attorney prosecuting a civil commitment petition under the SVPA may obtain copies of the treatment records supporting the updated or replacement evaluators' opinions about an individual's suitability for designation as an SVP. We must also resolve whether those records may be shared with a mental health expert retained by the district attorney to assist in the prosecution of the SVP petition.

What we conclude is that a recent amendment to the SVPA, enacted after we granted review, allows the district attorney to obtain those otherwise confidential records. The district attorney may then disclose those records to its retained expert, subject to an appropriate protective order, to assist in the cross-examination of the SDSH evaluators or mental health professionals retained by the defense and, more generally, in prosecuting the SVP petition. We therefore affirm the Court of Appeal.

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives