People v. Wermuty CA4/1
Filed 6/30/23 P. v. Wermuty CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, D081421
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCN034737)
CHRIS MATHEW WERMUTY,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Runston G. Maino, Judge. Appeal dismissed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent. Defendant Chris Mathew Wermuty, aka Chris Mathew Wermuth, (Wermuth) appeals an order extending for an additional two years his civil commitment to the California Department of Mental Health (DMH) as a person who was previously found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGI). On appeal his appointed counsel raises no arguable issues, but requests that we nevertheless exercise our discretion to conduct an independent review of the
record. However, we agree with the reasoning and holding in People v. Martinez (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1226 (Martinez) that the procedures set forth in Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) and People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) do not apply to an extension of an NGI civil commitment. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal without conducting an independent review of the record pursuant to Anders/Wende or otherwise. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Wermuth pleaded guilty in 1996 to recklessly causing a fire of a structure or a forest (Pen. Code, § 452, subd. (c)). The court found he was insane at the time of the offense and committed him to the State Department of Mental Health pursuant to Penal Code section 1026. The court has extended his commitment numerous times over the years. In 2020, Wermuty stipulated to an extension of his commitment until November 27, 2022. The People filed a petition for extension in July 2022 alleging he still suffers from a mental disease, defect, or disorder and by reason of such mental disease, defect, or disorder represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others. In support of the petition, the People attached the declaration of Paul Ananias, D.O., the medical director of the state hospital, who provided his opinion that Wermuth is still suffering from a mental disease, defect, or disorder and, as a result, continues to represent a substantial danger of physical harm to others. It also attached a report from a senior psychologist specialist regarding his May 2022 evaluation with his opinion that Wermuth should be considered for an extension of commitment because he represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others and has serious difficulty controlling his dangerous behavior because of his mental disease, defect, or disorder.
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)