People v. Morrison, H050677

Matthew Morrison was convicted of a sexually violent offense and faced commitment under the California Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA) upon his release from prison.
The SVPA permits the civil commitment of offenders with specific mental disorders who are likely to reoffend sexually; commitment proceedings follow specialized statutory processes.
At several pre-trial hearings, Morrison’s counsel waived his personal appearance and requested a jury trial but later agreed to a court trial; the trial court did not obtain a personal waiver from Morrison regarding the right to a jury.
Morrison was committed for an indeterminate term; on appeal, he argued his constitutional rights were violated because he was not personally advised of his right to a jury trial nor did he personally waive it.
Morrison specifically asserted that the SVPA’s lack of a requirement for a personal jury trial advisement and waiver, unlike other civil commitment statutes, was a violation of equal protection.
The appellate court addressed the proper level of constitutional scrutiny for Morrison’s equal protection claim and ultimately remanded the case for further proceedings.

Issue	Morrison's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Does the SVPA’s lack of personal jury trial advisement/waiver violate equal protection?	Disparate treatment as compared to other civil commitment statutes violates equal protection; strict scrutiny should apply due to deprivation of liberty.	Rational basis review is appropriate; any differences in procedures are justified by legislative discretion.	Rational basis review applies; remand for Morrison to raise the equal protection claim in trial court.

People v. Barrett, 54 Cal.4th 1081 (Cal. 2012) (upheld use of rational basis review regarding procedural differences in civil commitment statutes)
People v. Blackburn, 61 Cal.4th 1113 (Cal. 2015) (held personal advisement and waiver of jury trial right required under OMHD statutes)
People v. Tran, 61 Cal.4th 1160 (Cal. 2015) (personal advisement and waiver of jury trial right required for NGI commitments)
People v. McKee, 47 Cal.4th 1172 (Cal. 2010) (applied heightened scrutiny to certain SVPA provisions; did not hold all must meet strict scrutiny)
People v. Hardin, 15 Cal.5th 834 (Cal. 2024) (clarified that rational basis is ordinarily the applicable standard in equal protection challenges not involving fundamental rights or suspect classes)
People v. Williams, 17 Cal.5th 99 (Cal. 2024) (cautioned against automatic use of strict scrutiny solely due to a liberty interest)