California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Cooley v. Superior Court, 127 Cal.Rptr.2d 177, 29 Cal.4th 228, 57 P.3d 654 (Cal. 2002):
Applying the rule of statutory construction that "`provisions relating to the same subject matter must be harmonized to the extent possible'" (Lakin v. Watkins Associated Industries (1993) 6 Cal.4th 644, 659, 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 109, 863 P.2d 179), we find that a finding of the existence of a mental disorder is, therefore, also implicit in the determination of dangerousness to be made at the probable cause hearing. We can conclude, therefore, that the probable cause hearing necessarily encompasses at least two of the elements required at trial: a finding by the superior court of a statutorily defined diagnosed mental disorder and a finding of future dangerousness whether a person is likely to commit sexually violent predatory behavior upon release.10
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.