## Facts

- Allman had been a fixated female pedophile since he was 10 years old.
- He had multiple convictions for lewd acts with children and cycled through periods of incarceration and institutional treatment for pedophilia, followed by probation.
- During his most recent probationary period, Allman committed multiple sexually violent offenses against girls ranging from age five to 15.
- Allman pleaded guilty to multiple charges and was committed to Atascadero State Hospital as a sexually violent predator (SVP) under California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA).
- While at Atascadero, Allman routinely took anti-androgen medication designed to reduce testosterone and suppress sexual urges.
- Allman refused to participate in cognitive-behavioral therapy aimed at treating his pedophilia.
- He also refused to acknowledge that his pedophilic conduct was wrong.
- Before completing his full commitment term, Allman petitioned for conditional release.
- Treating/evaluating doctors testified that Allman would likely reoffend if conditionally released because he had not participated in treatment, maintained an attitude consistent with reoffending risk, and could obtain testosterone supplements outside the hospital to counteract the anti-androgen effects.
- The trial court denied the petition, finding Allman had not proven he would not be a danger to others if released.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court properly denied Allman’s SVPA petition for conditional release where he relied primarily on anti-androgen medication to argue he was unlikely to reoffend.
2. Whether evidence that Allman refused therapy, failed to accept wrongdoing, and could defeat the medication’s effect supported a finding that he remained a danger if released.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the order denying conditional release.
- The court accepted the trial court’s determination that Allman bore the burden to show he would not be a danger to the community if released under conditions.
- The court held that the testimony from Atascadero doctors supported the finding that anti-androgens, without meaningful participation in treatment and with a realistic possibility of noncompliance or circumvention outside custody, did not sufficiently reduce Allman’s risk of reoffense.

## Legal Principles

- On an SVPA petition for conditional release, the committed person must prove that conditional release will not pose a danger to the health and safety of others.
- Courts may consider pharmacological interventions that reduce sexual drive, but medication does not, by itself, require conditional release when other risk factors remain unaddressed.
- Refusal to participate in sex-offender treatment and refusal to accept responsibility can support an expert opinion that the person remains likely to reoffend.
- When evidence shows the person could discontinue or counteract medication in the community, a court may treat medication-based risk reduction as uncertain.
- Appellate review of a conditional-release denial is deferential; the order will be upheld when supported by substantial evidence, including professional risk testimony.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of Allman’s SVPA conditional-release petition because the trial court could reasonably find—based on doctors’ testimony about untreated pedophilia, refusal of therapy, lack of acceptance of wrongdoing, and the ease of counteracting anti-androgens outside the hospital—that Allman failed to prove he would not be a danger if released.


People v. Allman, 2003 WL 1558186 (2003)