What is the test for determining whether a defendant would be an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety?

Defendant challenges the trial court's determination that his release would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety. He posits the trial court applied an erroneous standard because a high level of risk was required and he had only a "moderate" risk of danger to others according to recent progress reports submitted pursuant to section 1026. (See 1026, subd. (f) [requiring medical director of facility to submit semi-annual reports to the court on defendant's status and progress].) We disagree. The standard for risk of danger to public safety is neither moderate nor high, but "unreasonable." ( 1170.126, subd. (f); see People v. Garcia (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 763, 769 ["The critical inquiry . . . is not whether the risk is quantifiable, but rather, whether the risk would be 'unreasonable' "].) And this was the determination the trial court made. Defendant also asserts that, in deciding whether he posed an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety, the trial court should have applied the definition set forth in Proposition 47 that by its terms applies throughout the Penal Code and requires an unreasonable risk that he would commit a violent felony. ( 1170.18, subd. (c).) This

Page 6