discussed Cited "see" State v. Daniel OO. Petitioner has long had “authority under its police power to protect the community from the dangerous tendencies of some who are mentally ill” (Addington v Texas, 441 US at 426 ; see Hubbart v Knapp, 379 F3d 773, 780 [9th Cir 2004], cert denied 543 US 1071 [2005]; Matter of KL., 1 NY3d at 370 ), and we agree with the District Court that this interest is, without question, “of the highest order” (Mental Hygiene Legal Serv. v Spitzer, 2007 WL 4115936 , *20, 2007 US Dist LEXIS 85163 , *71 [SD NY 2007]).

discussed Cited "see" Black v. Voss See Hubbart v. Knapp, 379 F.3d 773, 777 (9th Cir.2004) (habeas petition challenging a two-year commitment under California's Sexually Violent Predator Act was found to “evade review” because the duration of the commitment was too short to be fully litigated prior to its expiration), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1071 , 125 S.Ct. 913 , 160 L.Ed.2d 807 (2005). 2 .

discussed Cited "see" Rosenkrantz v. Marshall See Hubbart v. Knapp, 379 F.3d 773, 777 (9th Cir.2004) (habeas petition challenging a two-year commitment under California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act was found to "evade review” because the duration of the commitment was too short to be fully litigated prior to its expiration), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1071 , 125 S.Ct. 913 , 160 L.Ed.2d 807 (2005). 10 .