BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1412|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1412
Author: Nielsen (R)
Amended: 8/19/14
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 4/29/14
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Knight, Liu, Mitchell, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: De Le�n
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 5/23/14
AYES: De Le�n, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
SENATE FLOOR : 34-0, 5/27/14
AYES: Anderson, Beall, Block, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De
Le�n, DeSaulnier, Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Hancock,
Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Knight, Lara, Leno,
Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nielsen, Padilla, Pavley, Roth,
Steinberg, Torres, Vidak, Walters, Wolk, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Berryhill, Calderon, Lieu, Liu, Wright, Yee
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 8/21/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Criminal proceedings: mentally incompetent
offenders
SOURCE : California District Attorneys Association
DIGEST : This bill applies procedures relative to persons who
are incompetent to stand trial (IST) to persons who may be
mentally incompetent and face revocation of probation, mandatory
CONTINUED
SB 1412
Page
2
supervision, postrelease community supervision (PRCS), or
parole.
Assembly Amendments add double-jointing language with AB 2186
(Lowenthal) and AB 2625 (Achadjian); add clarifying language as
it pertains to the public guarding and all available
alternatives to conservatorship; and delete the provision that
would authorize the court to order parolees committed to the
state hospital to restore to competency.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1. States that a person cannot be tried or adjudged to
punishment while he/she is mentally incompetent (incompetent
to stand trial).
2. Provides that a defendant is IST where he/she has a mental
disorder or developmental disability that renders him/her
unable to understand the nature of the criminal proceedings
or assist counsel in his/her defense.
3. States that if the court has a doubt as to whether or not
a defendant is IST, the court shall state that doubt on the
record and shall seek defense counsel's opinion as to the
defendant's competence.
4. Provides the following hearing procedures to determine
whether the defendant is mentally competent or not:
A. The court shall appoint a psychiatrist or psychologist
to examine the defendant. If the defendant is not seeking
a finding of mental incompetence, the court shall appoint
two psychiatrists or psychologists. The examining expert
shall evaluate the nature of the defendant's mental
disorder; his/her ability to understand the proceedings or
assist counsel in the conduct of a defense; and whether or
not treatment with medications is medically appropriate and
likely to restore the defendant to competency.
B. The counsel for the defendant shall offer evidence in
support of the allegation of mental incompetence.
C. The prosecution shall present its case regarding the
issue of the defendant's present mental competence.
CONTINUED
SB 1412
Page
3
D. Each party may present rebutting testimony, unless the
court, for good reason in furtherance of justice, also
permits other evidence in support of the original
contention.
1. States that if the defendant is found mentally competent,
the criminal process shall resume.
2. States that if the defendant is found IST, the matter
shall be suspended until the person becomes mentally
competent.
3. States that prior to committing an IST defendant for
treatment, the court shall determine whether the defendant
consents to the administration of antipsychotic medications,
as specified.
4. Includes detailed procedures for review of orders for
involuntary antipsychotic medication and to determine
whether a person committed as IST without a medication order
should be medicated.
This bill:
1.Provides that only a court trial is required to determine
competency in any proceeding for a violation of probation,
mandatory supervision, PRCS, or parole.
2.Requires a committed defendant who has not recovered
competency to be returned to the committing court no later
than the shorter of the maximum term of imprisonment provided
by law for a violation of probation or mandatory supervision
or other terms specified in existing law.
3.Requires the court to reinstate mandatory supervision in a
proceeding alleging a violation of that supervision if the
person is not placed under a conservatorship, as described, or
if a conservatorship is terminated.
4.Allows the court, when reinstating mandatory supervision, to
modify the terms and conditions of mandatory supervision to
include appropriate mental health treatment or refer the
matter to a local mental health court, reentry court, or other
CONTINUED
SB 1412
Page
4
collaborative justice court available for improving the mental
health of the defendant.
5.Requires the court, if the defendant is found mentally
incompetent during a PRCS or parole revocation hearing, to
dismiss the revocation hearing and return the defendant to
supervision. Allows the court, except as specified, if the
revocation hearing is dismissed because of the defendant's
incompetency, to, using the least restrictive option to meet
the defendant's mental health needs, do any of the following:
A. Modify the terms and conditions of supervision to
include appropriate mental health treatment;
B. Refer the matter to any local mental health court,
reentry court, or other collaborative justice court
available for improving the mental health of the defendant;
or,
C. Refer the matter to the public guardian of the
commitment county to initiate conservatorship proceedings,
as specified. Provides that the court is to use this option
only if there are no other reasonable alternatives to
establishing a conservatorship to meet the defendant's
mental health needs.
1.Prohibits, if a conservatorship is established as specified in
the provisions above, the county or the California Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation from compassionately
releasing the defendant or parolee or otherwise causing the
termination of his or her supervision or parole based on the
establishment of the conservatorship.
2.Repeals law held unconstitutional relative to misdemeanor-only
provisions in IST cases.
3.Makes conforming changes to apply procedures relative to
persons who are IST to persons who may be mentally incompetent
and face revocation of probation, mandatory supervision, PRCS,
or parole. Makes technical, non-substantive changes.
4.Makes other technical, non-substantive changes.
5. Contains double-jointing language with AB 2186 (Lowenthal)
CONTINUED
SB 1412
Page
5
and AB 2625 (Achadjian).
Comments
According to the author's office, for decades, California law
has prohibited a person from being tried or punished while that
person is mentally incompetent. The statutes governing
competency to stand trial apply not only to criminal trials, but
also to probation revocation hearings.
In the wake of realignment, two new classes of supervision were
created; mandatory supervision and PRCS. Mandatory supervision
is the portion of a local prison sentence served in the
community under the supervision of a probation officer. Every
day served on mandatory supervision is deducted from the
original prison term. PRCS effectively replaced parole for
persons who were sentenced to state prison for non-violent,
nonserious, and non-sexual crimes. Rather than being supervised
by a state parole agent upon release from state prison, they are
released on PRCS and supervised by county probation departments.
Unfortunately, while the existing statutes apply to criminal
trials and probation revocation hearings, they are silent with
respect to revocation hearings for offenders on PRCS and
mandatory supervision. When these two classes of supervision
were created in AB 109 (Budget Committee, Chapter 15, Statutes
of 2011) there were no corresponding changes made to the laws
governing competence.
As a result, there is no lawful mechanism to assist these
offenders when a judge or attorney suspects the offender may not
be competent to understand the proceedings or assist their
attorney in a PRCS or mandatory supervision revocation hearing.
This bill takes the existing process for evaluating and treating
mentally incompetent defendants in criminal trials and probation
revocation hearings, and creates a similar process for use in
PRCS and mandatory supervision revocation hearings. Please see
the policy committee analysis for a full discussion of this
bill.
Prior Legislation
AB 366 (Allen, Chapter 654, Statutes of 2011) modifies the
process by which individuals that are declared IST can be
involuntarily medicated.
CONTINUED
SB 1412
Page
6
SB 1794 (Perata, Chapter 486, Statutes of 2004) established the
standards for the administration of antipsychotic medication to
persons found IST.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee this bill
essentially applies the existing statutory framework for
determining and dealing with defendant competency to the
post-realignment world. As such, it is not likely this bill will
create additional cases and additional workload for the courts
and state and local mental health agencies. According to
representatives of the courts and district attorneys, in most
cases defense attorneys and prosecutors are operating under the
current statutory construct, albeit one that does not
specifically reference mandatory supervision and PRCS.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/21/14)
California District Attorneys Association (source)
California Council of Community Mental Health Agencies
California Sheriffs' Association
Mental Health America of California
Judicial Council of California
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 8/21/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,
Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez,
Holden, Jones, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein,
Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian,
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, John A. P�rez, V.
Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas,
Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Jones-Sawyer, Vacancy
CONTINUED
SB 1412
Page
7
JG:nl 8/21/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED