Competency to Stand Trial in Criminal Proceedings
INCOMPETENCY TO
STAND TRIAL
ART. 46B.003
•
Lacks rational and factual understanding of
the proceedings
•
Cannot consult with counsel
•
Presumed competent
•
Burden of Proof by a preponderance
Raising the Issue of Incompetency
Art. 46B.004
Incompetency may be raised by:
state
defense
the court
any credible source
Stay of all other proceedings
Informal Inquiry
Art. 46B.004(c)
What Is An Informal Inquiry?
An informal inquiry is a hearing at which the
moving party tries to convince the court that
there is enough evidence of the defendant’s
incompetence to require a competency
evaluation.
The Rules of Evidence do not apply at an
informal inquiry.
Court Ordered Evaluation of the
Defendant
•
If the court finds there is some evidence
to indicate that the defendant is
incompetent to stand trial, the court is
required to order an examination of the
defendant by one or more qualified
experts to determine whether the
defendant is incompetent to stand trial.
Art. 46B.021(b).
Factors Experts Must Consider in Evaluating
Defendants Art. 46B.02
The capacity of the defendant during criminal
proceedings to:
Rationally understand the charges against him
Rationally understand the potential consequences of the pending
criminal proceedings
Disclose to counsel pertinent facts, events and states of mind
Engage in a reasoned choice of legal strategies and options
Understand the adversarial nature of the criminal proceedings
Exhibit appropriate courtroom behavior; and
testify
The Expert’s Report
The report must state the expert’s opinion on
competency or incompetency and other
factors set out in Art. 46B.025
Due in 30 days after Court’s Order
Copies to Court, State and Defense
Competency Disposition Options
•
Agreed Competency
•
Agreed Incompetency
•
Trial Before the Court
•
Trial Before a Jury
ISSUES AT THE COMPETENCY TRIAL
and
The New Ballgame Under 46B.071(b)
1. Competency
2. Likelihood of restoration
3. Mental Illness/Mental Retardation
4. Meeting Criteria
Found Incompetent and Likely To Be
Restored Within the Foreseeable Future
If it is found that an incompetent defendant
is likely to be restored to competency
within the foreseeable future, the court
determines duration and place of
commitment pursuant to Arts. 46B.072 or
46B.073 C.C.P.
THE COMMITMENT DETERMINATION
•
The trial court determines place of
commitment
•
The court’s options range from outpatient
to maximum security
.
DURATION OF INITIAL COMMITMENTS
DURATION OF INITIAL COMMITMENTS
Felonies
Felonies
Inpatients and Outpatients 120 days
Inpatients and Outpatients 120 days
Misdemeanors
Misdemeanors
Inpatients 60 days
Inpatients 60 days
Outpatients 120 days
Outpatients 120 days
•
Art. 46B.072 and Art. 46B.073
Art. 46B.072 and Art. 46B.073
Procedures on Credible Evidence of
Immediate Restoration
Art.
46B.0755
REDETERMINATION OF
COMPETENCY ARTS. 46B.108-117
Notice of Defendant’s Return to Court
Art. 46B.079
The outpatient provider or facility head is
required to notify the court:
1.
When the treatment team believes defendant has
attained competency
2.
When the treatment team believes defendant will not
attain competency within the foreseeable future or
3.
Of impending expiration of defendant’s commitment
order at least 15 days before the commitment order is
due to expire
Procedures Upon Defendant’s Return to Court
Civil Commitment Hearings
Defendants With Mental Illness
Civil Commitment Issues
•
Competency
•
Mental Illness
•
Inpatient criteria
•
Expected 90 day duration of
illness
•
Been an inpatient for 60
consecutive days in
preceding 12 months
D
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
1
2
m
o
n
t
h
s
Defendant’s With Mental Retardation
Civil Commitment Issues
•
Competency
•
Mental Retardation
•
Criteria for Long Term
Commitment
D
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
L
o
n
g
T
e
r
m
Maximum Period of Restoration
and
Time Credits Arts
•
Art. 46B.009 Time Credits
•
Art. 46B.0095 Maximum Period of
Commitment or Outpatient Treatment Program
Participation Determined by Maximum Term for
Offense
•
Art. 46B.010 Mandatory Dismissal of
Misdemeanor Charges
Court Ordered Medication of Incompetent
Defendants
574.106 Health and Safety Code
•
Danger to Self or Others
•
Lacks capacity to decide
•
Defendant’s best interest
•
Filed by treating M.D.
•
Applicable to defendants
•
In custody awaiting trial
•
In jail 72 hrs. awaiting
transfer
•
Under inpatient court order
46B.086 C.C.P.
•
Failed 574.106 hearing
•
Outpatients
•
Restored Defendants
•
MR Commitments
•
In custody awaiting transfer
to MH or MR facility
•
Defendants in inpatient
facilities
•
Continuity of care plan
requirement
•
Testimony of 2 physicians
required
Effective September 1, 2004, Chapter 46B. C.C.P. replaced Article 46.02 C.C.P. as the chapter governing competency to stand trial in state courts.
Chapter 46B. applies to all felony offenses and Class A & B misdemeanors. Article 46B.002 C.C.P.
Definition
A defendant is incompetent to stand trial if he cannot consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and/or
he lacks a rational and/or factual understanding of the proceedings against him.
Constitutional Considerations
Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 385, 5 L. Ed. 2d 815, 86 S. Ct. 386 (1966) held that a trial court must make inquiry into a criminal defendant’s mental competence once the issue is sufficiently raised.
In Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162, 171, 43 L. Ed. 2d 103, 95 S. Ct. 896 (1975) the Supreme Court held the due process right to a fair trial prevents the government from subjecting a person to trial whose mental condition is such that he lacks the capacity to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against him, to consult with his counsel and to assist in preparing his defense.
Scope of the Competency Issue
The issue of incompetency applies to trial on the merits and to all phases of criminal proceedings. Unless competent, a defendant cannot knowingly waive his right to trial and enter a plea of guilty. Hall v. State, 808 S.W. 2d 282 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st. Dist] 1991, no writ). Pipken v. State, 671 S. W. 2d 626 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1984 pet. ref’d) held that the issue of incompetency must be resolved before hearing a motion to revoke probation. In Bradford v. State, 172 S.W. 3d 1 (Tex. App.-Ft. Worth 2005, no pet.) the court ruled that it was reversible error to hear a motion to adjudicate guilt when the record did not reflect that the defendant had been restored to competency
Explore the process of determining if a defendant is competent to stand trial, including raising the issue of incompetency, court-ordered evaluations, factors considered by experts, and competency disposition options. The procedures and considerations involved in assessing a defendant's ability to understand legal proceedings are outlined in detail.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
INCOMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL ART. 46B.003 Lacks rational and factual understanding of the proceedings Cannot consult with counsel Presumed competent Burden of Proof by a preponderance
Raising the Issue of Incompetency Art. 46B.004 Incompetency may be raised by: state defense the court any credible source Stay of all other proceedings
Informal Inquiry Art. 46B.004(c) What Is An Informal Inquiry? An informal inquiry is a hearing at which the moving party tries to convince the court that there is enough evidence of the defendant s incompetence to require a competency evaluation. The Rules of Evidence do not apply at an informal inquiry.
Court Ordered Evaluation of the Defendant If the court finds there is some evidence to indicate that the defendant is incompetent to stand trial, the court is required to order an examination of the defendant by one or more qualified experts to determine whether the defendant is incompetent to stand trial. Art. 46B.021(b).
Factors Experts Must Consider in Evaluating Defendants Art. 46B.02 The capacity of the defendant during criminal proceedings to: Rationally understand the charges against him Rationally understand the potential consequences of the pending criminal proceedings Disclose to counsel pertinent facts, events and states of mind Engage in a reasoned choice of legal strategies and options Understand the adversarial nature of the criminal proceedings Exhibit appropriate courtroom behavior; and testify
The Experts Report The report must state the expert s opinion on competency or incompetency and other factors set out in Art. 46B.025 Due in 30 days after Court s Order Copies to Court, State and Defense
Competency Disposition Options Agreed Competency Agreed Incompetency Trial Before the Court Trial Before a Jury
ISSUES AT THE COMPETENCY TRIAL and The New Ballgame Under 46B.071(b) 1. Competency 2. Likelihood of restoration 3. Mental Illness/Mental Retardation 4. Meeting Criteria
Found Incompetent and Likely To Be Restored Within the Foreseeable Future If it is found that an incompetent defendant is likely to be restored to competency within the foreseeable future, the court determines duration and place of commitment pursuant to Arts. 46B.072 or 46B.073 C.C.P.
THE COMMITMENT DETERMINATION The trial court determines place of commitment The court s options range from outpatient to maximum security.
DURATION OF INITIAL COMMITMENTS Felonies Inpatients and Outpatients 120 days Misdemeanors Inpatients 60 days Outpatients 120 days Art. 46B.072 and Art. 46B.073
Procedures on Credible Evidence of Immediate Restoration Art. 46B.0755
REDETERMINATION OF COMPETENCY ARTS. 46B.108-117
Notice of Defendants Return to Court Art. 46B.079 The outpatient provider or facility head is required to notify the court: When the treatment team believes defendant has attained competency When the treatment team believes defendant will not attain competency within the foreseeable future or Of impending expiration of defendant s commitment order at least 15 days before the commitment order is due to expire 1. 2. 3.
Procedures Upon Defendants Return to Court Civil Commitment Hearings Defendant s With Mental Retardation Defendants With Mental Illness Civil Commitment Issues Competency Mental Illness Inpatient criteria Expected 90 day duration of illness Been an inpatient for 60 consecutive days in preceding 12 months Duration of Commitment 12 months Civil Commitment Issues Competency Mental Retardation Criteria for Long Term Commitment Duration of Commitment Long Term
Maximum Period of Restoration and Time Credits Arts Art. 46B.009 Time Credits Art. 46B.0095 Maximum Period of Commitment or Outpatient Treatment Program Participation Determined by Maximum Term for Offense Art. 46B.010 Mandatory Dismissal of Misdemeanor Charges
Court Ordered Medication of Incompetent Defendants 46B.086 C.C.P. 574.106 Health and Safety Code Danger to Self or Others Lacks capacity to decide Defendant s best interest Filed by treating M.D. Applicable to defendants In custody awaiting trial In jail 72 hrs. awaiting transfer Under inpatient court order Failed 574.106 hearing Outpatients Restored Defendants MR Commitments In custody awaiting transfer to MH or MR facility Defendants in inpatient facilities Continuity of care plan requirement Testimony of 2 physicians required
