P. v. Palomino
Defendant Julio Cesar Palomino appeals from an order of commitment finding him to be a sexually violent predator (SVP) within the meaning of Welfare and Institutions Code section 6600 et seq., the Sexually Violent Predator Act.[1] He claims the order of commitment must be reversed because the petition for recommitment was based upon a standardized assessment protocol that was not properly promulgated as a regulation under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (Gov. Code, § 11340 et seq.). He argues that, if the improper regulation issue was not properly preserved, then he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. In addition, defendant makes several constitutional challenges to the current version of California's Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA).
Court affirm the order committing defendant as an SVP, except as to the portion committing him for an indeterminate term, which we reverse with further directions.
Comments on P. v. Palomino