Court declared Defendant a sexually dangerous person (SDP) and committed him to custody of Director of Corrections. Eight years later, Defendant filed motion which court construed as application for recovery. An evaluator filed a socio-psychiatric report, concluding that under DSM-V, Defendant no longer qualified for diagnosis of pedophilic disorder and thus was not longer an SDP. After bench trial, court properly found State had failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence Defendant remained an SDP, and ordered Defendant to be discharged without conditions. SDP Act means that discharge is to be ordered if the Defendant is no longer sexually dangerous. Court is to consider present, not past, mental conditions and determines whether a person is sexually dangerous on date of decision.(HARRIS, specially concurring; STEIGMANN, dissenting.)