People v. Lindsey

Opinion

FILES, P. J.

While an information charging defendant with three felonies was pending, the superior court determined, after a hearing, that defendant was then insane within the meaning of Penal Code sections 1367-1370. On May 21, 1971, the court committed him to a state hospital for care and treatment. Defendant is appealing from that order.

On August 25, 1971, the superior court received notice that the superintendent of the state hospital had certified that defendant had become sane. Pursuant to Penal Code section 1372 defendant was brought back to the court and the criminal charges were set for trial.

The order of commitment made May 21, 1971, is an appealable judgment.

(People

v.

Fields

(1965) 62 Cal.2d 538 [42 Cal.Rptr. 833, 399 P.2d 369, 16 A.L.R.3d 708].) Since a person committed under Penal Code

[744]

section 1370 must be held until he becomes sane, such a commitment may result in a permanent deprivation of liberty. In this case the superintendent’s certification of sanity terminates the commitment, leaving no prejudicial consequences which could be ameliorated by a successful appeal. This appeal has therefore become moot and must be dismissed.

When.a person has been convicted of a crime, the fact that he has served his term of imprisonment does not make the appeal moot, as he is entitled to appeal the conviction for the sake of clearing his name.

(In re Byrnes

(1945) 26 Cal.2d 824, 827 [161 P.2d 376].) This principle was applied in

People

v.

Succop

(1967) 67 Cal.2d785 [63 Cal.Rptr. 569, 433 P.2d 473] which held that an order committing the defendant civilly as a probable mentally disordered sex offender (former Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5500, now § 6300 et seq.) was reviewable on an appeal from an ensuing criminal judgment, despite the fact that the civil proceedings had been terminated. The court pointed out that the finding was relevant to the question whether probation should be granted, and further that the defendant was entitled to clear his name;