P. v. Robledo
Filed 4/7/06 P. v. Robledo CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ARTHUR ROBLEDO, Defendant and Appellant. | H028429 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 210648) |
Defendant Arthur Robledo was first committed to Atascadero State Hospital as a sexually violent predator (SVP) pursuant to the Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) in 2001. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6600 et seq.)[1] In January 2005, a jury determined that defendant remained a sexually violent predator. Accordingly, the court recommitted defendant for another two years. Defendant challenges the 2005 order of recommitment, asserting that the admission of hearsay evidence about his victims' statements contained in police reports violated his due process right to confrontation under Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36 (Crawford). We hold that Crawford does not apply to SVP trials and, under existing case law, his due process rights were not violated. We therefore affirm the recommitment order.
SVPA Trial Proceedings
The only witness called at trial was Dr. Clark Richard Clipson, a clinical psychologist. Dr. Clipson was recognized by the court as an expert â€
