In Re the Care & Treatment of Castiglia

Missouri Court of Appeals

In Re the Care & Treatment of Castiglia

278 S.W.3d 249, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 359, 2009 WL 685599

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 17, 2009

DocketED 90488

StatusPublished

This text of 278 S.W.3d 249 (In Re the Care & Treatment of Castiglia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re the Care & Treatment of Castiglia, 278 S.W.3d 249, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 359, 2009 WL 685599 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert Castiglia appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Pike County, the Honorable David Ash presiding, after a jury unanimously decided that Castiglia should be civilly committed pursuant to Missouri’s sexually violent predator law. § 632.495 RSMo. (2000). Castiglia’s sole point on appeal is that the burden of proof under the statute, clear and convincing evidence, violated his constitutional right to due process. He argues that the State should have to prove his status as a sexually violent predator beyond a reasonable doubt.

We have reviewed the briefs and the record on appeal, and no error of law appears. The United States Supreme Court and the Missouri Supreme Court have both ruled on this specific issue and have found no constitutional violation with *250 the clear and convincing evidence standard. Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 432-33, 99 S.Ct. 1804, 60 L.Ed.2d 323 (1979); In re Van Orden, 271 S.W.3d 579, 586 (Mo.2008). Thus, a written opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Robert Castiglia appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Pike County, the Honorable David Ash presiding, after a jury unanimously decided that Castiglia should be civilly committed pursuant to Missouri’s sexually violent predator law. § 632.495 RSMo. (2000). Castiglia’s sole point on appeal is that the burden of proof under the statute, clear and convincing evidence, violated his constitutional right to due process. He argues that the State should have to prove his status as a sexually violent predator beyond a reasonable doubt.

We have reviewed the briefs and the record on appeal, and no error of law appears. The United States Supreme Court and the Missouri Supreme Court have both ruled on this specific issue and have found no constitutional violation with *250 the clear and convincing evidence standard. Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 432-33, 99 S.Ct. 1804, 60 L.Ed.2d 323 (1979); In re Van Orden, 271 S.W.3d 579, 586 (Mo.2008). Thus, a written opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 S.W.3d 249, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 359, 2009 WL 685599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-care-treatment-of-castiglia-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack