Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Parker

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division

January 13, 2020

The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
Andrew Joseph PARKER, Defendant and Respondent.

         [257 Cal.Rptr.3d 494] Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo, Jesse John Marino, Judge (Super. Ct. No. 18PT-00854)

Page 287

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 288

          COUNSEL

         Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Zee Rodriguez, Susan Sullivan Pithey and Amanda V. Lopez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

         Gerald J. Miller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent.

          OPINION

         TANGEMAN, J.

Page 289

          The Mentally Disordered Offender Act (MDO Act) provides that individuals with severe mental disorders who are convicted of certain felonies may be ordered to participate in inpatient mental health treatment after they have completed their prison terms. (Pen. Code,[1] § 2960 et seq.) To qualify as a mentally disordered offender (MDO), a prisoner must have "been in treatment for the severe mental disorder for 90 days or more within the year prior to [their] parole or release." (§ 2962, subd. (c).) Here we consider whether treatment during an extension of a prisoner’s custodial time to complete a psychiatrist’s evaluation (see § 2963) may be included in the required 90 days of treatment. We conclude that it can.

          The Attorney General appeals from the trial court’s order finding that Andrew Joseph Parker did not meet the criteria to be treated as an MDO because he did not receive 90 days of treatment before his scheduled parole date. He contends treatment during the additional 45-day custody period authorized by the Board of Parole Hearings (Board) pursuant to section 2963 should have counted toward the 90 days of treatment required by section 2962, subdivisions [257 Cal.Rptr.3d 495] (c) and (d)(1). We agree, and reverse.

          FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

          On December 19, 2017, Parker pled no contest to making criminal threats (§ 422). The trial court sentenced him to two years in state prison. Over the next two months, Parker received 17 days of mental health treatment while housed in the county jail.

          Parker was delivered to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) on February 16, 2018, with a scheduled release date of March 31. Daily treatment at CDCR for Parker’s mental disorder began on February 22. On March 20, the Board ordered Parker to remain in custody for 45 days beyond his scheduled release date, through May 14. Treatment of Parker’s mental health disorder continued during this ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.