Opinion
H044428
07-05-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARK STEVEN SIMMONS, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. E9909752)
Defendant Mark Steven Simmons appeals from a trial court order extending his commitment as a mentally disturbed offender. Defendant has been subject to involuntary treatment for a severe mental disorder since his parole in 2003. On April 20, 2016, the District Attorney of Santa Clara County filed a petition to extend the order compelling involuntary treatment. At a court trial, defendant disputed his treating physician's diagnosis, and argued instead that he suffers from narcissistic disorder. The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that Simmons suffers from a severe mental disorder that cannot be kept in remission without treatment and ordered an extension of his commitment. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
In his opening brief, defendant relies on the factual and procedural summary in People v. Simmons (Jan. 31, 2008, H031491) [nonpub. opn.] and People v. Simmons, (August 5, 2004, H026672) [nonpub. opn.], prior unpublished opinions of this court regarding defendant. We take judicial notice of those decisions and our prior decisions in People v. Simmons (Jun. 5, 2013, H037403) [nonpub. opn.] and People v. Simmons (Nov. 4, 2013, H039198) [nonpub. opn.]. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) For a full recitation of the factual and procedural history, please refer to those decisions. --------
On appeal, we appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts but raises no specific issues. (Conservatorship of Ben C. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 529, 543-544 (Ben C.); People v. Taylor (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 304.) Pursuant to Ben C., on January 5, 2018, we notified Defendant of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days.
On January 16, 2018 we received a letter from defendant. To his letter, defendant attaches a copy of a document entitled, "Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty." Defendant contends that this document disproves the expert testimony that his military service was a delusion. Defendant contends that without this conclusion by the expert, there was insufficient evidence to support the finding of current dangerousness. Defendant's claim is inconsistent with the facts of the case. At trial, the expert testified that defendant posed an ongoing danger to the community based on a variety of factors, including his disorder and poor insight. In his letter, defendant does not address any of the additional factors supporting current dangerousness enumerated by the expert at trial. He fails to explain how the attached document undermines the finding of current dangerousness, or why the additional factors are insufficient to support it.
The defendant having failed to raise any issue on appeal, we must dismiss the appeal. (Ben C., supra, 40 Cal.4th 529.)
DISPOSITION
The appeal is dismissed.
/s/_________
Greenwood, P.J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
Bamattre-Manoukian, J. /s/_________
Grover, J.