Legal Opinion
People v. Bendovid
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
Decided December 20, 2018No. 2d Crim. No. B288633PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, P. J.
*587Mentally disordered offenders (MDO's) committed for treatment lose their freedom. Courts must ensure strict compliance *588with statutory requirements to guarantee that commitments are not arbitrary and comport with due process.
Yosef Shavuii Bendovid appeals an order committing him for treatment as an MDO pursuant to Penal Code section 2962.1 We conclude, among other things, that Bendovid did not receive 90 days of treatment for his disorder "within the year" prior to his "parole or release." ( § 2962, subd. (c).) We reverse.
FACTS
In 2015, Bendovid was convicted of assault with force likely to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Kansas v. CraneSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Loper v. MorrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- United States v. Ruiz-GaxiolaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- United States v. BushCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009
- Bushling v. Fremont Medical CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. J.T. CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2020
- People v. Pierre R.California Court of Appeal · 2019
- People v. Robinson CA1/3California Court of Appeal · 2020