gno.law

People v. Barnes

California Court of Appeal · Crim. 8795 · 1978-09-11 · Published · 84 Cal. App. 3d 745 · 148 Cal. Rptr. 824 · 1978 Cal. App. LEXIS 1914

The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RICHARD ARNOLD BARNES, Defendant and Appellant

Proceeding
appeal
Trial court
Superior Court of San Diego County
Trial judges
Earl H. Maas, Jr.; No. CR-33983; Douglas R. Woodworth
Outcome
reversed — the judgment is reversed.
Area
criminal
Panel
Janice R. Brown (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion — Brown

Opinion BROWN (Gerald), P. J.

Defendant Richard Barnes was convicted of involuntaiy manslaughter (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. 2). He was examined psychiatrically, was declared not to be a mentally disordered sex offender (MDSO), sentence was suspended and he received probation. Two years later, Barnes was booked for kidnaping (Pen. Code, § 207) and the charges were dismissed when the victim could not be found; probation was revoked, criminal proceedings were adjourned on August 26, 1977; he was certified to the psychiatric department of the superior court and found to be a MDSO not amenable to treatment (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6300 et seq.). He claims the superior court erred because he did not commit a sex offense as required by the statutes.

Effective January I, 1977, certification must be based on a conviction of a sex offense, where registration is required under Penal Code section *747 290, or by clear proof the offense was committed primarily for purposes of sexual arousal or gratification (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 6302).

Here the only conviction Barnes had was for involuntary manslaughter, not an offense requiring registration under section 290. The certification is on an old superior court form when section 6302 required only that it “appear ... to the Court that the defendant has been convicted of a criminal offense” rather than requiring there be clear proof of a sex offense.

Because the certification order fails to make the finding required by law the judgment is reversed.

Wiener, J., and Welsh, J., * concurred.

A petition for a rehearing was denied September 27, 1978.

* Assigned by the Chairperson of the Judicial Council.

Cited by