Opinion
No. C042997.
10-16-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CRAIG WARRENER JACKSON, Defendant and Appellant.
In 1993, defendant Craig Warrener Jackson was found to have been insane when he assaulted a police officer with a deadly weapon and exhibited a deadly weapon with the intent to resist arrest. (Pen. Code, §§ 1026, 1026.5, 245, subd. (c), 417.8.) Defendant was committed to a state hospital for a maximum confinement period of six years. Since the expiration of his original confinement period in 1998, his commitment was extended by the court for two years in 1998 and two more years in 2000. (Pen. Code, § 1026.5, subd. (b)(8).)
The current petition to extend the commitment was filed in 2002. Defendant waived a jury trial, and testimony by two state hospital evaluators and by defendant was introduced. The trial court found defendant continued to suffer from a mental disorder and posed a substantial risk of physical harm to others, requiring a two-year extension of his commitment at Napa State Hospital. (Pen. Code, § 1026.5, subd. (b)(1).)
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief.
A two-page handwritten document filed by defendant raises no cognizable claim of error.
We must review the entire record in the light most favorable to the trial courts decision. "`[S]ection 1026.5, subdivision (b)(8) . . . limits each extension of commitment to a two-year period. In order for the confinement to be extended, the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the patient is mentally ill and a physical danger to others. [Citation.] (People v. Wilder (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 90, 98; see also People v. Tilbury (1991) 54 Cal.3d 56, 63.)" (People v. Crosswhite (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 494, 501.) One psychiatric opinion that a person is dangerous as a result of a mental disorder is sufficient evidence to support the extension of a commitment under Penal Code section 1026.5. (People v. Superior Court (Williams) (1991) 233 Cal.App.3d 477, 490.)
Having examined the entire record, we find no arguable error.
DISPOSITION
The judgment (order extending the commitment) is affirmed.
We concur: HULL, J. and ROBIE, J.