Skip to content
Name: People v. Gordon
Case #: H021806
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 09/17/2001
Subsequent History: Petitions for review GRANTED 12/12/01
Summary

The SVPA law does not violate the state and federal guarantees of equal protection and the prohibitions against ex post facto laws and double jeopardy. Instruction requiring the jury to find defendant was likely to engage in sexually violent criminal behavior, instead of predatory behavior, was harmless error. But the court found that a proper instruction should use the word predatory, not criminal. The trial court did not err by refusing to accept a stipulation to defendant’s convictions of two predicate sexually violent offenses because the testimony about the details of these offenses was highly probative of whether defendant had a diagnosed mental disorder that made him a danger to the health and safety of others in that he was likely to engage in sexually violent criminal behavior.