Filed 12/18/17 P. v. Jordan CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE


THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
ISMAEL JORDAN,
Defendant and Appellant.


A150122

(San Francisco County
Super. Ct. No. 108543)


In 1982, Ismael Jordan pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to charges including murder (Penal Code, § 187), and assault with intent to commit rape (§ 220). The court found Jordan insane, and committed him to an indeterminate term in a state hospital. In 2016, Jordan moved the court for an order “deleting any requirement that he register as a sex offender.” The court denied the motion, and Jordan appeals. We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. Jordan’s Conduct, Arrest, and Commitment
In May 1982, Jordan, “in an acute psychotic state, escaped from San Francisco General Hospital . . . [and] reached a nearby park where he disrobed and grabbed his first female victim by the hair, threw her to the ground, hit her, and pulled her face toward his penis. The victim’s husband pulled Mr. Jordan away from her. Mr. Jordan then ran to a nearby house, kicked the door in, seized two knives from the kitchen and attacked his second female victim; a sleeping semi-invalid octogenarian, who later died of her injuries. He ran out of the house and was sprayed with mace by a police officer. Mr. Jordan . . . ran back into the house and out the back door where he shortly encountered his third victim (also a female). He stabbed this elderly woman in the face and neck with a kitchen knife until she was rescued by a group of nuns . . . . His fourth victim was a woman whom he hit in the face with both fists, he pulled down her pants and began lacerating her buttock with a knife. . . . [and] pushed the knife into her rectum. The victim was left with a permanent colostomy and lost sight in one of her eyes. Mr. Jordan continued to move about the streets escaping two attempts by police to apprehend him until finally he was subdued by eight police officers.”
Jordan was charged with twelve counts, including murder (§ 187). At his arraignment, Jordan pleaded not guilty to all charges. Jordan subsequently withdrew his plea, waived his right to trial by jury, and pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to murder (§ 187; count 1), assault with intent to commit rape (§ 220; count 2), attempted murder (§ 664/187; counts 5, 7), acts of forcible sexual penetration (§ 289; count 9), and assault with a deadly weapon on a police officer (§ 245, former subd. (b); count 10). The court dismissed the other charges and struck a number of sentencing enhancement allegations.
In November 1982, the court found Jordan committed murder in the second degree, and further found Jordan was insane at the time he committed the offenses. The court committed Jordan to state hospital for a term of 49 years to life. In May 1999, Jordan was admitted to Napa State Hospital.
B. Jordan’s Petitions for Restoration of Sanity
Over the years, Jordan petitioned the court a number of times for an order finding him restored to sanity and seeking release to an outpatient program. The court denied Jordan’s 2010 petition, and he withdrew his 2012 petition. Jordan registered as a sex offender “at some point on or after September, 2012.” In November 2015, Napa State Hospital issued a report, recommending, for the first time, appropriate outpatient treatment for Jordan. In August 2016, the court denied Jordan’s request for outpatient treatment.
In October 2016, Jordan filed a new petition seeking restoration of sanity. As part of this proceeding, Jordan moved to “delete” the requirement that he register as a sex offender pursuant to section 290 because he sought admission to an outpatient program that “does not accept 290 registrants as patients.” The court denied Jordan’s motion. Jordan appeals.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, Jordan contends section 290.004 “does not impose a registration requirement on a person found not guilty by reason of insanity who has not also been found guilty of the underlying crime in the guilt phase of a trial.” We disagree and affirm.
A. Governing Law
“A defendant who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, without also pleading not guilty, thereby admits the commission of the offense charged.” (§ 1016.) “If a defendant pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, and also joins with it another plea or pleas, the defendant shall first be tried as if only the other plea or pleas had been entered . . . . If the jury find the defendant guilty, or if the defendant pleads only not guilty by reason of insanity, the question whether the defendant was sane or insane at the time the offense was committed shall be promptly tried . . . .” (§ 1026, subd. (a).)
“[A]ny person who has been found guilty in the guilt phase of a trial for an offense for which registration is required by this section but who has been found not guilty by reason of insanity in the sanity phase of the trial shall register in accordance with the [Sex Offender Registration] Act.” (§ 290.004.)
B. Jordan Is Required to Register as a Sex Offender
The People contend the record does not support Jordan’s assertion “that there was no guilt phase in his 1982 trial” and accordingly “he has not met his high burden of rebutting the presumption that the trial court properly found that he was guilty.” Assuming, without deciding, that Jordan did not enter a plea of not guilty, and that there was no guilt phase in Jordan’s 1982 trial, we find that section 290.004 still applies.
“A defendant who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, without also pleading not guilty, thereby admits the commission of the offense charged.” (§ 1016.) If a defendant “chooses to plead not guilty by reason of insanity only, the law (statute) says, in effect, that he has pleaded guilty to the charge. He is wholly free to prevent that result by . . . making the additional plea of not guilty. . . . He is not presumed guilty unless he selects that course by his pleading.” (People v. Walker (1948) 33 Cal.2d 250, 262 (Walker); People v. Blacksher (2011) 52 Cal.4th 769, 851 (Blacksher) [“The entry of both pleas means that, as a matter of law, defendant’s insanity plea did not function as an admission of guilt.”].)
If, as Jordan argues, he pleaded only not guilty by reason of insanity, then he was presumed guilty of the charges, which negated the need for a guilt phase trial. (Walker, supra, 33 Cal.2d at pp. 260, 262; Blacksher, supra, 52 Cal.4th at p. 851.) In other words, based on Jordan’s plea, there was no need for Jordan to be “found guilty in the guilt phase of a trial.” (§ 290.004.) When interpreting a statute, “[l]iteral construction should not prevail if it is contrary to the legislative intent apparent in the statute.” (Lungren v. Deukmejian (1988) 45 Cal.3d 727, 735.) Jordan provides no explanation why a defendant who is presumed guilty and found insane should be treated differently than a defendant found guilty and insane for purposes of sex offender registration.
The charges against Jordan included assault with intent to commit rape (§ 220), and acts of forcible sexual penetration (§ 289). Persons convicted of these offenses must register as sex offenders. (§ 290, subd. (c).) Jordan was presumed guilty of these offenses, and the court found him insane at the time he committed them. As a result, section 290.004 requires Jordan to register in accordance with the Sex Offender Registration Act.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.





_________________________
Jones, P. J.


We concur:


_________________________
Simons, J.


_________________________
Needham, J.