California Prosecution Seeking to Commit Detainee as Sexually Violent Prisoner Limited in Discovery
California Prosecution Seeking to Commit Detainee as Sexually Violent Prisoner Limited in Discovery
The California Appeals Court for the Fourth District, Division Two has limited the State of California’s (“State”) discovery to detainee’s “updated mental evaluation” information.
Chaka Gilbert was sent to Coalinga State Hospital (CSH) after several evaluations by doctors in the State’s efforts to commit Gilbert as a sexually violent predator (SVP) under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (SUPA). AS Gilbert awaited trial, the State sought Gilbert’s psychological records, among others, from CSH. Gilbert filed a motion in the San Bernardino County Superior Court to suppress the records, except for updated mental evaluation documents pursuant to the SUPA. The superior court denied the motion and Gilbert subsequently filed a petition in the appellate court. On February 6, 2014, the appellate court, in a writ to be issued and served by Gilbert, directed the superior court to grant Gilbert’s motion, limiting discovery to his “updated mental evaluation” information.
The superior court found probable cause to commit Gilbert as a SVP in October 2001, after he had been evaluated by doctors. Following further updated evaluations in 2006 and December 2009, the court again found probable cause in October 2010, leading Gilbert to be placed in CSH, his trial eventually set for March 2014. Through a subpoena duces tecum (subpoena), the state sought documents pertaining to Gilbert from CSH, including visitor logs, trust account information and psychological and medical records.
Gilbert’s motion to prevent the discovery was denied by the superior court, except the court did prohibit the disclosure of Gilbert’s visitor and trust account information, holding that the records were not discoverable under the subpoena. Gilbert then filed his petition in the appellate court.
According to the appellate court, pursuant to section 5328 of the Welfare and Institutions Code (W.I.C.), “records obtained in the course of providing services to…recipients of services under the SVPA shall be confidential.” The California Supreme Court had held that “an exception to section 5328’s general rule of confidentiality of treatment records[]” resides in W.I.C. section 6603, subsection (c)(1), which “allows the [State] access to treatment record information, insofar as that information is contained in an updated evaluation.”
The State argued that under a subsection of section 5328, records can be disclosed “[t]o the courts, as necessary to the administration of justice.” The appellate court concluded that the exception did not apply to the State and that section 6603, subsection (c) allowed the State a level of access to documents that section 5328 never could. The appellate court also stated that a subpoena does not allow the State any additional access than that permitted in section 6603.
The State further claimed that the intent of section 6603, subsection (c)(1) was to help in the preparation of a prosecutor’s case by providing current information. The appellate court offered that, “there may be other means to discover this,” but ultimately held that section 6603, subsection (c)(1) limited the State’s discovery to “updated mental evaluation” information. See: Gilbert v. Superior Court, 224 Cal. App. 4th 376 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2014).
Related legal case
Gilbert v. Superior Court
| Year | 2014 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 224 Cal. App. 4th 376 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2014) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |