People v. Torfason

Filed 8/21/19 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B293047 (Super. Ct. No. 18PT-00615) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

JAMES PAUL TORFASON,

Defendant and Appellant.

In this case we decide whether a mentally disordered offender (MDO) can be recommitted for treatment of a different mental disorder than the one which formed the basis of the original commitment. We conclude that a recommitment order must be based on the same mental disorder that was the basis for the original commitment. James Torfason appeals an order recommitting him to the California Department of Mental Health as an MDO. (Pen. Code,1 § 2966, subd. (c).) He contends the recommitment order must be reversed because it was based on a different disorder

1 Further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

than the disorder which formed the basis of his original commitment as an MDO. We agree and reverse. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In 2017, the Board of Prison Terms (the Board) found Torfason met the criteria for an MDO commitment under section 2962. At trial, the experts opined Torfason suffered from both bipolar disorder and pedophilia. They opined he met all the criteria for MDO commitment based on his bipolar disorder. They opined that he did not meet the criteria based on his pedophilic disorder because he did not receive at least 90 days treatment for that disorder. (§ 2962.) The trial court found Torfason met the criteria for an MDO commitment based on his bipolar disorder. We affirmed the order. (People v. Torfason (Apr. 17, 2018, B286335 [nonpub. opn.].) In 2018, the Board found Torfason met the requirements for recommitment as an MDO. Dr. Dia Gunnarsson, a forensic psychologist at Atascadero State Hospital, opined Torfason suffered from bipolar disorder and pedophilia. Based on Torfason’s statements in his interview and his medical record, Gunnarsson opined that Torfason’s bipolar disorder was in remission. Gunnarsson opined that Torfason’s pedophilia was not in remission. She testified that Torfason lacked insight into his diagnosis, did not complete his group therapy treatment, and had no viable relapse prevention plan. She opined that Torfason posed a substantial risk of harm to others because of his pedophilic disorder. The trial court found the criteria under section 2962 to be true and recommitted him to the California Department of