Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> California Appellate Report

Federal Judiciary

: California Appellate Report

People v. Superior Court (Salter) (Cal. Ct. App. - Feb. 24, 2011)

By Shaun Martin

George Salter gets committed to Atascadero State Hospital.  After he's served his time, the medical director at Atascadero seeks to keep him there, believing him to be a mentally disordered offender.  So the State files the appropriate charges.  Thereafter, Salter gets reviewed by two independent experts.

The first expert says, nope, Salter's fine.  He should be released.

The second experts says, you know what, I agree.  Salter's fine.  He should be released.

At which point the medical director at Atascadero says, well, I guess we were wrong about Salter.  I agree that at this point, he should be released.

There's no expert testimony that says Salter's a mentally disordered offender, or qualifies for involuntary treatment.  All the experts agree that he doesn't qualify, and should be freed.  Same with the director of the hospital.  So the trial court lets him go.

The Court of Appeal reverses.

Nope.  Even though all the evidence is one way, the People are still entitled to a trial.  And to keep Salter in involuntary treatment in the meantime.  (Which is also why the Court of Appeal granted a stay of Salter's release.)  'Cause at one point, before the hospital changed its mind, someone wanted him committed.  That's enough to keep him in.  Even though every single expert -- and the hospital itself -- now agrees that he doesn't qualify.

Sounds like justice, eh?

Full post as published by California Appellate Report on March 01, 2011 (boomark / email).