Legal Opinion

People v. Marchman

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 27, 2006No. C048996PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BUTZ, J.

Defendant Darrell Keith Marchman was committed for an additional year of involuntary mental health treatment under the Mentally Disordered Offender Act (hereafter MDO Act), Penal Code section 2960 et seq. He appeals contending, inter alia, that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the recommitment petition. He asserts that, under the MDO Act, the district attorney has no authority to file a petition unless the medical director of the treating state hospital determines that the severe mental disorder is not in remission or cannot be kept in remission without…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  2. California Manufacturers Ass'n v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  3. People v. Superior Court (Ghilotti)California Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Butler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  5. Peters v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. KarrikerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. San Francisco Human Services Agency v. Felicia C.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  3. Cuccia v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  5. People v. KendridCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

4 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