From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wilson

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Sep 26, 2008
No. F053625 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 26, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHN McKINLEY WILSON, Defendant and Appellant. F053625 California Court of Appeal, Fifth District September 26, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Marie Sovey Silveira, Judge Super. Ct. No. 1001791.

Deborah L. Hawkins, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Birgit Fladager, District Attorney, Carol Shipley, Assistant District Attorney, Nathan Baker and Peggy Richards, Deputy District Attorneys, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

THE COURT

Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Kane, J.

This appeal is from the trial court’s order converting a previous two-year civil commitment under the former version of what is commonly known as the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.) to an indeterminate term of commitment in light of the 2006 amendments to the SVPA. The trial court applied the changes to the SVPA to convert retroactively a prior expired two-year SVP commitment to an indeterminate SVP commitment without trial during the pendency of a recommitment petition, without a new determination of sexually violent predator (SVP) status. We agree this was error. As a result, we will reverse the commitment order and remand for a trial to determine whether appellant John McKinley Wilson is currently an SVP. If, after trial of the issue, a jury decides that Wilson remains an SVP, Wilson may be committed under the amended statute for an indeterminate term.

All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise noted.

Procedural and Factual Histories

Wilson committed his first SVPA qualifying offense in 1975. He was convicted of rape by force or threat, after raping a 77-year-old woman in her home during a robbery. In 1980, while on parole for the first offense, Wilson committed his second qualifying offense. He was convicted of rape by force or threat and forced oral copulation. Both sex offenses were committed with a hostage taken after the robbery of a convenience store. Wilson was also identified as having committed two additional rapes, one in 1974 and one in 1975, although he was not brought to trial on these offenses. Wilson behaved poorly as a prisoner, collecting numerous prison rule violations.

Wilson was initially found by a jury to be an SVP in May 2000. He was committed to Atascadero State Hospital for two years. Extensions were sought and obtained by respondent Stanislaus County District Attorney, committing Wilson through May 2006, the last determination being made by jury trial in December 2005. Prior to the December 2005 trial, in October 2005, a new extension petition was filed, seeking commitment for the period of 2006 to 2008. The findings of the jury in December 2005 were deemed by the trial court as probable cause to hold a trial on the October 2005 extension petition. The petition was supported, as were all previous petitions, by two evaluations from psychologists who opined that Wilson was an SVP as defined by the SVPA, and concluding that Wilson would be a danger to society if released. During the pendency of the petition, the SVPA was amended by Senate Bill No. 1128, signed into law as emergency legislation in September 2006. (Stats. 2006, ch. 337, §§ 53-62.) After amendment, section 6604 provided: “If the court or jury determines that the person is a sexually violent predator, the person shall be committed for an indeterminate term to the custody of the State Department of Mental Health for appropriate treatment and confinement .…” Shortly thereafter, the voters approved Proposition 83, which amended several statutes addressing violent sex offenses, including the SVPA. (See Historical and Statutory Notes, 73D West’s Ann. Welf. & Inst. Code (2008 supp.) foll. § 6604, p. 134; Prop. 83, § 27, as approved by voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 7, 2006, eff. Nov. 8, 2006).) Like Senate Bill No. 1128, Proposition 83 changed the two-year civil commitment term to an indeterminate civil commitment.

In April 2007, the People filed a motion asking that Wilson’s commitment be converted to an indeterminate term. The trial court granted the motion and ordered that Wilson be committed to the Department of Mental Health, Coalinga State Hospital, for an indeterminate term, subject to the annual reviews provided under the SVPA.

Discussion

On appeal, Wilson raises a single challenge to the order. He claims the 2006 amendments to the SVPA cannot be applied retroactively to convert his prior two-year commitment to an indeterminate commitment without a new determination that he is an SVP. We agree and will reverse.

The Sixth Appellate District has decided this issue in its well-reasoned decision, People v. Whaley (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 779, 784. Review was denied in Whaley on June 18, 2008, case No. S162151. In Whaley, like the situation here, a petition to extend Whaley’s most recent term of commitment was pending when the statutory changes became effective. On a motion brought by the prosecution, and without trial, the trial court converted the initial two-year commitment to an indeterminate term. (Id. at p. 803.) In addressing the question presented here, whether converting a prior two-year commitment to an indeterminate term without a new determination of SVP status is statutorily permissible, the appellate court in Whaley found nothing in the language or history of Proposition 83 or Senate Bill No. 1128 suggesting an intention that the changes to the SVPA be applied retroactively to previous or pending petitions for commitment. (People v. Whaley, supra, at p. 803; accord, Bourquez v. Superior Court (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1275, 1287 and People v. Carroll (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 503, 513.) It is well settled that a statute is presumed to operate prospectively unless there is a clear intent expressed or implied in the legislative history or in the context of the enactment that the law be applied retroactively. (People v. Ledesma (2006) 39 Cal.4th 641, 664; Evangelatos v. Superior Court (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1188, 1207-1210; see also Pen. Code, § 3; Civ. Code, § 3.)

Having concluded that the statutory changes were to be applied prospectively only, the Whaley court observed that, under the former versions of sections 6604 and 6604.1, before a previously committed SVP could be recommitted, he or she was entitled to an extension proceeding at which there would be a new determination of SVP status. It then concluded that the trial court erred when it retroactively converted the prior commitment order to an indeterminate term without a new SVP determination. The court reversed the commitment order, sending the matter back for a new determination of SVP status on the pending petition. (People v. Whaley, supra, 160 Cal.App.4th at p. 803.) We agree with the Whaley analysis and conclusion. “A statute has retrospective effect when it substantially changes the legal consequences of past events.” (Western Security Bank v. Superior Court (1997) 15 Cal.4th 232, 243.) Application of the statutory changes to modify a previously adjudicated two-year commitment term to an indeterminate term without a new SVP determination substantially changes the legal consequences of the prior SVP determination and is an impermissible retroactive application of the statute. The statutory amendments may not be applied retroactively to convert the initial SVP commitment or any subsequent two-year recommitment to an indeterminate term without a current determination of SVP status.

Disposition

The order of indeterminate commitment is reversed. The matter is remanded for additional proceedings and a new determination of Wilson’s SVP status.


Summaries of

People v. Wilson

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Sep 26, 2008
No. F053625 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 26, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHN McKINLEY WILSON, Defendant…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fifth District

Date published: Sep 26, 2008

Citations

No. F053625 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 26, 2008)

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Some of the facts and history are taken from our unpublished decision in…