Appellant initially demanded a jury trial on an SVP recommitment, but then his counsel represented to the court that he wanted a court trial. The trial court accepted the representation and proceeded with a court trial without obtaining a personal waiver of jury trial. Following the court trial, appellant was recommitted as an SVP. On appeal, he contended that the trial court erred in accepting counsel’s representation. The appellate court rejected the argument, finding that the court was not required to confirm the representation with a personal waiver from appellant. An SVP proceeding is a civil proceeding with a statutory right, not a constitutional right to jury trial. Under the statute, a jury trial is waived by the failure to request one. Counsel’s representation that a jury is waived was sufficient.