Bill Text: CA AB1237 | 2015-2016 | Regular Session | Introduced


Bill Title: State hospitals: placement evaluations.

Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)

Status: (Failed) 2016-02-01 - From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56. [AB1237 Detail]

Download: California-2015-AB1237-Introduced.html
BILL NUMBER: AB 1237	INTRODUCED
	BILL TEXT


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  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,   appoint an evaluation panel that
has been convened pursuant to Section 7233 of the Welfare and
Institutions Code  to examine the defendant and investigate his
or her mental status. It is the duty of the  psychiatrists or
psychologists selected and appointed   evaluation panel
 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  psychiatrists or psychologists
appointed by the court   members of the evaluation
panel  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 
trial.   trial to the State Department of State
Hospitals. 
   (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  psychiatrist or psychologist  
evaluation panel  in making  his or her  
the panel's  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  a psychiatrist or
psychologist   an evaluation panel  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)  Any psychiatrist or psychologist   The
members of an evaluation panel  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  psychiatrist
or psychologist,   members of the evaluation panel,
 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  psychiatrist or psychologist 
 members of the panel  were  a witness 
 witnesses  for the adverse party. When  a member of
 the  psychiatrist or psychologist   panel
 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  a psychiatrist or licensed
psychologist,   an evaluation panel that has been
convened pursuant to Section 7233 of the Welfare and Institutions
Code,  and any other expert  with forensic experience 
the court may deem appropriate, to examine the defendant. In any case
 where   in which  the defendant or the
defendant's counsel informs the court that the defendant is not
seeking a finding of mental incompetence, the  court shall
appoint two psychiatrists, licensed psychologists, or a combination
thereof. One of the psychiatrists or licensed psychologists may be
named by the   defense and   one
may be named by the prosecution.   defense and the
prosecution shall each confer with the State Department of State
Hospitals regarding the selection of the panelists.  The
examining  psychiatrists or licensed psychologists 
 panelists  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  psychologist
  panelist  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 
psychologist   panelist  shall inform the court of
this opinion and his or her recommendation as to whether a
psychiatrist should examine the defendant. The examining 
psychiatrists or licensed psychologists   panelists
 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).
                                              
feedback