Skip to content
Name: Seeboth v. Mayberg
Case #: 09-15330
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 10/27/2011

Appeal of habeas petition dismissed as moot where defendant does not challenge legality of SVP proceeding commenced while he was in lawful custody. Over a number of years defendant was convicted nine times for committing sexual acts with minors. In 1997 he was determined to be a sexually violent predator (SVP). He was held for consecutive two-year terms from 1997 until 2005. While defendant was still serving a term in 2005, the prosecution filed a petition to extend his commitment. A series of appeals and post-conviction proceedings followed, resulting in the instant petition. While these proceedings were pending, Proposition 83 was adopted in California, changing the renewable two year SVP commitments to indeterminate terms. In Bourquez v. Superior Court (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1275, the court held that pending petitions for two year extensions could be considered petitions for indefinite commitments. Defendant’s 2005 petition went to trial in 2010 and, once the jury found him a SVP, he was committed for an indefinite term. Defendant’s petition contended he was denied due process because he was held under the SVP act from 2005 until 2010 without trial. However, the 2005 petition was filed when defendant was in lawful custody, which he did not challenge in the present appeal. Because defendant is in custody for an indefinite term which was lawfully commenced and the results of that trial are not challenged on appeal, the case is denied as moot.