legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re DAVID WOODROW SMITH Part I

In re DAVID WOODROW SMITH Part I
07:17:2006


In re DAVID WOODROW SMITH




Filed 7/10/06





CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION





IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA



SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION SEVEN










In re DAVID WOODROW SMITH,


on Habeas Corpus.



B184548


(Los Angeles County


Super. Ct. Nos. ZM007064,


NA052811)



PETITION for writ of habeas corpus. Writ denied.


David Woodrow Smith, in pro. per.; and J. Courtney Shevelson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Petitioner.


Steve Cooley, District Attorney, Brentford J. Ferreira, Phyllis C. Asayama and Rebecca Marie Madrid, Deputy District Attorneys, for Respondent.


_______________________


Petitioner David Woodrow Smith challenges his confinement as a sexually violent predator (SVP) on the ground that the conviction that brought him into the SVP evaluation and commitment system was invalidated after the SVP commitment petition was filed. We deny the petition.


FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND


In 1982, Smith was convicted of four counts of oral copulation on a child under the age of 16 (Pen. Code, § 288a, subd. (b)(2)) and one count of sodomy of a child under the age of 16 (Pen. Code, § 286, subd. (b)(2)). In 1988, Smith was convicted of 15 counts of committing lewd and lascivious acts on a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a).) Smith was released on parole in July 1995 and completed parole in July 1998.


Because of his prior offenses, Smith was obligated to register as a sex offender. (People v. Smith (2004) 32 Cal.4th 792, 795 (Smith).) In April 1999 Smith moved to Colorado from California; then, nine days later, he moved to New York. (Ibid.) He claimed that he sent a change of address card for his Colorado address to the Long Beach Police Department on April 12, 1999, but the officer responsible for sex offender registration testified that he did not receive any such card. (Ibid.) When Smith did not appear in September 1999 to complete his annual registration, the Long Beach police began searching for him. (Ibid.) Smith was arrested in New York. (Ibid.)


Convicted of failing to register as a sex offender (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (g)), Smith was sentenced to five years in state prison on October 26, 2000. (Smith, supra, 32 Cal.4th at pp. 796-797.) The Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction on June 18, 2002. Smith petitioned for review of his conviction in the California Supreme Court, which granted review on September 18, 2002.


Smith asserts that he was scheduled for release on parole on January 6, 2004. While incarcerated, he was referred by the Department of Corrections and the Board of Prison Terms to the Department of Mental Health for evaluation as a potential SVP. On December 15, 2003, the District Attorney filed a petition for Smith's commitment as a SVP pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 6600 et seq. (the â€





Description Reversal of defendant's predicate sex-crime conviction does not preclude court from continuing with Sexually Violent Predator Act proceedings that had already begun. Trial court has jurisdiction over SVP proceeding initiated while defendant is in unlawful custody unless custody was obtained in bad faith. Custody of defendant was not obtained in bad faith where conviction was reversed based on trial judge's error of statutory interpretation in attempting to provide jurors with guidance in response to a question submitted during deliberations, an interpretation sufficiently reasonable to be affirmed by court of appeal, although reversed by supreme court. Statute eliminating punitive consequences of conviction after new trial is ordered does not bar SVP Act proceedings which are not considered punitive.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale