State v. Foster

Summary

The court held that an insanity acquittee subject to recommitment after the expiration of the initial maximum commitment term is not similarly situated to a civilly committed prison inmate, so the federal equal protection challenge to the recommitment scheme failed without reaching the level of scrutiny. The court also held that the trial court's finding of dangerousness was not clearly erroneous because the acquittee's violent index offenses, ongoing mental-health risks, limited period of conditional-release success, and continued need for substantial supervision supported recommitment. The judgment affirming continued commitment was affirmed.