California Legislature—2015–16 Regular Session

Assembly Bill No. 1237

Introduced by Assembly Member Brown

February 27, 2015

An act to amend Sections 1027 and 1369 of the Penal Code, and to add Section 7233 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to state hospitals.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 1237, as introduced, Brown. State hospitals: placement evaluations.

Existing law establishes the State Department of State Hospitals for the administration of state hospitals and provides for the involuntary confinement of certain individuals in those state hospitals, including a defendant who has been found mentally incompetent to stand trial or who has been found to be insane at the time he or she committed the crime. Existing law requires a court, when a defendant pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, or if there is a question as to the defendant’s mental competence, to appoint a specified number of psychiatrists or psychologists to examine the defendant.

This bill would require the State Department of State Hospitals to establish, within the department, a pool of psychiatrists and psychologists with forensic skills, and would require the department to create evaluation panels from the pool of psychiatrists and psychologists, as specified. The bill would require the court to order an evaluation panel to evaluate a defendant who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity or who may be mentally incompetent. The bill would also make conforming changes.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.  

Section 1027 of the Penal Code is amended to
read:

1027.  

(a) When a defendant pleads not guilty by reason of
insanity the court shall begin delete select and appoint two, and may select and
appoint three, psychiatrists, or licensed psychologists who have a
doctoral degree in psychology and at least five years of
postgraduate experience in the diagnosis and treatment of emotional
and mental disorders, end delete begin insert appoint an evaluation panel that has been
convened pursuant to Section 7233 of the Welfare and Institutions
Code end insert to examine the defendant and investigate his or her mental
status. It is the duty of the begin delete psychiatrists or psychologists selected
and appointed end delete begin insert evaluation panel end insert to make the examination and
investigation, and to testify, whenever summoned, in any
proceeding in which the sanity of the defendant is in question. The
begin delete psychiatrists or psychologists appointed by the court end delete begin insert members of
the evaluation panel end insert shall be allowed, in addition to their actual
traveling expenses, those fees that in the discretion of the court
seem just and reasonable, having regard to the services rendered
by the witnesses. The fees allowed shall be paid by the county
where the indictment was found or in which the defendant was
held for begin delete trial. end delete begin insert trial to the State Department of State Hospitals. end insert

(b) Any report on the examination and investigation made
pursuant to subdivision (a) shall include, but not be limited to, the
psychological history of the defendant, the facts surrounding the
commission of the acts forming the basis for the present charge
used by the begin delete psychiatrist or psychologist end delete begin insert evaluation panel end insert in making
begin delete his or her end delete begin insert the panel’s end insert examination of the defendant, the present
psychological or psychiatric symptoms of the defendant, if any,
the substance abuse history of the defendant, the substance use
history of the defendant on the day of the offense, a review of the
police report for the offense, and any other credible and relevant
material reasonably necessary to describe the facts of the offense.

(c) This section does not presume that begin delete a psychiatrist or
psychologist end delete begin insert an evaluation panel end insert can determine whether a
defendant was sane or insane at the time of the alleged offense.
This section does not limit a court’s discretion to admit or exclude,
pursuant to the Evidence Code, psychiatric or psychological
evidence about the defendant’s state of mind or mental or emotional
condition at the time of the alleged offense.

(d) Nothing contained in this section shall be deemed or
construed to prevent any party to any criminal action from
producing any other expert evidence with respect to the mental
status of the defendant. If expert witnesses are called by the district
attorney in the action, they shall only be entitled to those witness
fees as may be allowed by the court.

(e)  begin delete Any psychiatrist or psychologist end delete begin insert The members of an
evaluation panel end insert appointed by the court may be called by either
party to the action or by the court, and shall be subject to all legal
objections as to competency and bias and as to qualifications as
an expert. When called by the court or by either party to the action,
the court may examine the begin delete psychiatrist or psychologist, end delete begin insert members
of the evaluation panel, end insert as deemed necessary, but either party shall
have the same right to object to the questions asked by the court
and the evidence adduced as though the begin delete psychiatrist or psychologist end delete
begin insert members of the panel end insert were begin delete a witness end delete begin insert witnesses end insert for the adverse
party. When begin insert a member of end insert the begin delete psychiatrist or psychologist end delete begin insert panel end insert is
called and examined by the court, the parties may cross-examine
him or her in the order directed by the court. When called by either
party to the action, the adverse party may examine him or her the
same as in the case of any other witness called by the party.

SEC. 2.  

Section 1369 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

1369.  

Except as stated in subdivision (g), a trial by court or
jury of the question of mental competence shall proceed in the
following order:

(a) The court shall appoint begin delete a psychiatrist or licensed
psychologist, end delete begin insert an evaluation panel that has been convened pursuant
to Section 7233 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, end insert and any other
expert begin insert with forensic experience end insert the court may deem appropriate,
to examine the defendant. In any case begin delete where end delete begin insert in which end insert the defendant
or the defendant’s counsel informs the court that the defendant is
not seeking a finding of mental incompetence, the begin delete court shall
appoint two psychiatrists, licensed psychologists, or a combination
thereof. One of the psychiatrists or licensed psychologists may be
named by the end delete begin delete defense and end delete begin delete one may be named by the prosecution. end delete
begin insert defense and the prosecution shall each confer with the State
Department of State Hospitals regarding the selection of the
panelists. end insert The examining begin delete psychiatrists or licensed psychologists end delete
begin insert panelists end insert shall evaluate the nature of the defendant’s mental
disorder, if any, the defendant’s ability or inability to understand
the nature of the criminal proceedings or assist counsel in the
conduct of a defense in a rational manner as a result of a mental
disorder and, if within the scope of their licenses and appropriate
to their opinions, whether or not treatment with antipsychotic
medication is medically appropriate for the defendant and whether
antipsychotic medication is likely to restore the defendant to mental
competence. If an examining begin delete psychologist end delete begin insert panelist end insert is of the opinion
that antipsychotic medication may be medically appropriate for
the defendant and that the defendant should be evaluated by a
psychiatrist to determine if antipsychotic medication is medically
appropriate, the begin delete psychologist end delete begin insert panelist end insert shall inform the court of this
opinion and his or her recommendation as to whether a psychiatrist
should examine the defendant. The examining begin delete psychiatrists or
licensed psychologists end delete begin insert panelists end insert shall also address the issues of
whether the defendant has capacity to make decisions regarding
antipsychotic medication and whether the defendant is a danger
to self or others. If the defendant is examined by a psychiatrist and
the psychiatrist forms an opinion as to whether or not treatment
with antipsychotic medication is medically appropriate, the
psychiatrist shall inform the court of his or her opinions as to the
likely or potential side effects of the medication, the expected
efficacy of the medication, possible alternative treatments, and
whether it is medically appropriate to administer antipsychotic
medication in the county jail. If it is suspected the defendant is
developmentally disabled, the court shall appoint the director of
the regional center for the developmentally disabled established
under Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the Welfare
and Institutions Code, or the designee of the director, to examine
the defendant. The court may order the developmentally disabled
defendant to be confined for examination in a residential facility
or state hospital.

The regional center director shall recommend to the court a
suitable residential facility or state hospital. Prior to issuing an
order pursuant to this section, the court shall consider the
recommendation of the regional center director. While the person
is confined pursuant to order of the court under this section, he or
she shall be provided with necessary care and treatment.

(b) (1) The counsel for the defendant shall offer evidence in
support of the allegation of mental incompetence.

(2) If the defense declines to offer any evidence in support of
the allegation of mental incompetence, the prosecution may do so.

(c) The prosecution shall present its case regarding the issue of
the defendant’s present mental competence.

(d) Each party may offer rebutting testimony, unless the court,
for good reason in furtherance of justice, also permits other
evidence in support of the original contention.

(e) When the evidence is concluded, unless the case is submitted
without final argument, the prosecution shall make its final
argument and the defense shall conclude with its final argument
to the court or jury.

(f) In a jury trial, the court shall charge the jury, instructing
them on all matters of law necessary for the rendering of a verdict.
It shall be presumed that the defendant is mentally competent
unless it is proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the
defendant is mentally incompetent. The verdict of the jury shall
be unanimous.

(g) Only a court trial is required to determine competency in
any proceeding for a violation of probation, mandatory supervision,
postrelease community supervision, or parole.

SEC. 3.  

Section 7233 is added to the Welfare and Institutions
Code, to read:

7233.  

(a) The State Department of State Hospitals shall
establish a pool of psychiatrists and psychologists with forensic
skills who are employees of the department from which evaluation
panels shall be created pursuant to subdivision (b).

(b) The department shall create evaluation panels with each
panel consisting of three to five forensic psychiatrists or
psychologists from the pool created in subdivision (a).