People v. Bushee CA1/2
Filed 12/11/25 P. v. Bushee CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A172603 v. ANDY BUSHEE, (Solano County Super. Ct. Nos. FCR197955, FCR205793) Defendant and Appellant.
Andy Bushee, who has been committed under the Mentally Disordered Offender Act (Pen. Code,1 § 2962 et seq.) as a Mentally Disordered Offender (MDO) since 2006, appeals the trial court’s denial of his request to be released to an outpatient setting after a bench trial in which the court found Bushee continued to be an MDO and extended his commitment to the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) from March 10, 2025, to March 10, 2026. Bushee argues evidence presented at the one-day trial “would cause a reasonable person to have a strong suspicion that Bushee could be safely and effectively treated in the community,” and “[s]ubstantial evidence did not support the trial court’s ruling to the contrary.” We disagree and affirm the commitment.
1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
1
BACKGROUND In 2002 and again in 2003, Bushee pled no contest to two separate counts of battery on a non-confined person by a prisoner (§ 4501.5) and was sentenced to an aggregate term of three years in state prison. In 2006, Bushee was committed to the DSH as an MDO, and in 2009, he was transferred to Patton State Hospital, where he is currently housed. On August 23, 2024, pursuant to section 2970, the prosecution filed a petition to extend for a period of one year Bushee’s civil commitment that was set to expire on March 10, 2025, alleging that Bushee continued to suffer from a severe mental disorder that was not in remission and/or could not be kept in remission without treatment, and that he represented a substantial danger to others. Bushee denied the allegations of the petition and waived his right to a jury trial; a court trial was held on January 29, 2025, at which Bushee appeared via Zoom. On January 28, 2025, the Conditional Release Program (CONREP) filed a placement report with the court that was provided to the parties but was not admitted into evidence.2 At trial, Dr. Joshua Craig testified as an expert in the field of psychology and as Bushee’s primary treating psychologist at Patton State Hospital since June 2021. Dr. Craig represented he treats Bushee for a severe mental disorder and testified as to the related symptoms that Bushee displays, including “highly delusional beliefs,” anxiety, and aggression “towards himself and to others.” These symptoms “come in waves,” but “they . . . aren’t getting better. . . . [T]hey are staying consistent.” Bushee’s attendance in group sessions has been “poor,” somewhere “in the 40 to 50
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)