Legal Opinion

People v. Dean

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 22, 2009No. E041513PublishedCited by 23 opinions

[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KING, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant Jeffrey Farrar Dean appeals from a judgment and order committing him to the State Department of Mental Health as a sexually violent predator (SVP).

Defendant contends: (1) the trial court erroneously permitted plaintiff’s experts to testify to inadmissible hearsay; (2) as implemented in Riverside County, the appointment of only one expert for defendant violated his due process rights; and (3) his recommitment is illegal in that the protocols relied upon by plaintiff’s experts had not been adopted as administrative regulations. We affirm the judgment and…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. People v. EwoldtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. People v. GardeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Hubbart v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  5. People v. MontielCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. People v. HarrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  2. People v. StampsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  3. People v. SelivanovCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  4. People v. RoaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
  5. People v. Yates, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API