In re commitment of Conley

Respondent appealed from the circuit court’s judgment that he was a sexually violent person and committing him to institutional care under the Sexually Violent Persons Commitment Act. On appeal, respondent argued that the petition violated his right to a speedy trial, that the petition violated his right to be free from double jeopardy, that the petition was barred by the statute of limitations and res judicata, and that the evidence was not sufficient. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the petition was timely filed, that defendant was not subjected to double jeopardy or deprived of his right to a speedy trial, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that he was a sexually violent person. (MIKVA and TAILOR, concurring)