AB 1630

Bill Subjects

Abstract

Existing law prohibits a person from being tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent. Existing law establishes a process by which a defendant's mental competency is evaluated and by which the defendant receives treatment with the goal of returning the defendant to competency. Existing law requires a court to appoint 2 psychiatrists, licensed psychologists, or a combination thereof to examine a defendant if the defendant is not seeking a finding of mental incompetence. This bill would require the court to appoint one mental health professional to evaluate the defendant's mental competence. The bill would require the court to appoint 2 mental health professionals, as specified, only if, at the time of appointment, the defendant or their counsel objects to the mental competency evaluation and requests an evaluation by 2 court-appointed experts. The bill would also require the examining psychiatrists or licensed psychologists to evaluate the defendant's eligibility for mental health diversion. Existing law presumes that a defendant is competent unless shown, by a preponderance of evidence, that the defendant is incompetent. Existing law also requires the counsel for the defendant to offer evidence in support of the allegation of mental incompetence and, if they decline to do so, authorizes the prosecution to do so. This bill would delete the requirement that counsel for the defendant offer evidence in support of an allegation of mental incompetence, and would, if any report from a court-appointed psychiatrist or licensed psychologist indicates that the defendant is incompetent to stand trial, instead presume the defendant incompetent and allow the prosecution to offer evidence in support of an allegation of mental competence. The bill would allow the defense to present its case regarding the issue of the defendant's present mental incompetence at the conclusion of the prosecution's case. The bill would retain the presumption that the defendant is mentally competent if all reports from the court-appointed psychiatrists or licensed psychologists indicate that the defendant is mentally competent, unless it is proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is mentally incompetent. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain a database of state summary criminal history information, as defined, and to provide that information upon request and as specified. Existing law includes a finding of mental incompetence arising out of a complaint charging a specific set of sex crimes as part of the state summary criminal history information. Existing law defines "gravely disabled" to include a condition in which a person has been found mentally incompetent, as specified. Existing law allows for a conservator to be appointed for a person who is gravely disabled as a result of a mental health disorder or impairment by chronic alcoholism. This bill would require the clerk of the court, when a person is determined to be incompetent to stand trial or when a court determines that competency has been restored, to transmit that information to the Department of Justice for inclusion in the person's state summary criminal history information, and would make that information disclosable as part of the person's state summary criminal history information. If a person has been deemed incompetent to stand trial in any jurisdiction and there has been no certificate of restoration that has been accepted by a court, the bill would generally establish a presumption of mental incompetence and would require a court, before which a defendant is appearing on a new charge or specified proceeding, to ask the defendant's attorney about the defendant's mental competency. The bill would, if defense counsel opines that the defendant is or may be mentally incompetent, require the court to evaluate the defendant's mental competency, as specified, and would authorize the court to evaluate the defendant's mental competency if defense counsel opines that the defendant is mentally competent. This bill would, if the prosecution elects to dismiss and refile charges at the end of a commitment or upon a finding that the defendant is unlikely to be restored to competency in the foreseeable future, require the court to find the defendant is mentally incompetent. If, in the court's opinion, the defendant appears gravely disabled, as defined, the bill would require the court to order a conservatorship investigator to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant. If, however, the defendant is found not to be subject to commitment or detention, as specified, the bill would not subject the defendant to further confinement and the criminal action would be subject to dismissal. If the prosecution provides the court with substantial evidence creating doubt as to the defendant's current mental incompetence, the bill would require the court to appoint a psychiatrist or licensed psychologist to opine whether the defendant regained competence. The bill would require the court to hold a hearing to determine if competency has been restored, as specified, if, in the medical expert's opinion, the defendant has regained competency. If, in the medical expert's opinion, the defendant has not regained competency and the defendant appears to the court to be gravely disabled, the bill would require the court to order a conservatorship investigator to initiate conservatorship proceedings for the defendant. If, however, the defendant is not subject to commitment or detention, as specified, the bill would not subject the defendant to further confinement and the criminal action would be subject to dismissal.