P. v. Greenwood
Charles Edward Greenwood appeals from an order entered pursuant to the Mentally Disordered Offender (MDO) Act (Pen. Code, § 2960 et seq.),[1] extending his commitment to Napa State Hospital. Greenwood contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the trial court’s finding that he represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others if released. He also argues that the court failed to advise him of the right to a jury trial as required by the MDO Act and failed to obtain his personal waiver of the right, errors he claims warrant reversal.
We conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding and, although the record does not show that the court gave the required advisement or that Greenwood expressly waived the right, the evidence is such that it is not reasonably probable that a jury would have reached a different result. (People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836 (Watson).) Accordingly, we shall affirm.
Comments on P. v. Greenwood