What is the difference between a conservatorship proceeding under the Mental Health Act and a criminal proceeding?

We find no similarity between the aims and objectives of the act and those of the criminal law. What we have said of commitment proceedings for the mentally retarded ( 6500-6513) is equally true of conservatorship proceedings under the act: "The commitment is not initiated in response, or necessarily related, to any criminal acts; it is of limited duration, expiring at the end of one year and any new petition is subject to the same procedures as an original commitment [citation]; the petitioner need not be a public prosecutor.... The sole state interest, legislatively expressed, is the custodial care, diagnosis, treatment, and protection of persons who are unable to take care of themselves and who for their own well being and the safety of others cannot be left adrift in the community. The commitment may not reasonably be deemed punishment either in its design or purpose. It is not analogous to criminal proceedings." (Cramer v. Tyars (1979) 23 Cal.3d 131, 137, 151 Cal.Rptr. 653, 588 P.2d 793; see also, Conservatorship of Baber (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 542, 550, 200 Cal.Rptr. 262 ["[a] conservatorship proceeding is not a prosecution for a particular act, but an attempt to determine a condition which is subject to change"].)