P. v. Rose
Ronald Forrest Rose appeals from the July 5, 2011 order committing him as a sexually violent predator (SVP) to the custody of the California Department of Mental Health (DMH) for an indeterminate term pursuant to California's Sexual Violent Predator Act (SVPA) (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.).[1] Appellant contends that the commitment violates due process because the 2009 version of the "standardized assessment protocol" underlying the evaluations leading to his commitment is invalid because it is not "standardized." Appellant further argues, that if this court finds that he forfeited the foregoing contention because his counsel failed to timely object, he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Lastly, he asserts that the indeterminate term of commitment violates the equal protection, ex post facto, double jeopardy, and due process clauses of the federal Constitution.
Appellant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the commitment order.
Comments on P. v. Rose