BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE
Office of Senate Floor Analyses
1020 N Street, Suite 524
(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) 327-4478
.
THIRD READING
.
Bill No: AB 145
Author: Rogan (R), et al
Amended: 6/28/95 in Senate
Vote: 21
.
SENATE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE COMMITTEE: 6-0, 7/5/95
AYES: Campbell, Johnson, Kopp, Polanco, Watson, Marks
NOT VOTING: Boatwright
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 9-0, 7/25/95
AYES: Campbell, Lockyer, Mello, O'Connell, Petris, Solis,
Wright, Leslie, Calderon
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 70-1, 6/2/95 - See last page for vote
.
SUBJECT: Mental competence
SOURCE: Author
.
DIGEST: This bill would establish special procedures be
established for conservatorships of persons judged
incompetent to stand trial who pose a danger to the public,
including requiring court authorization before a
conservator may remove such a conservatee from a locked
facility.
ANALYSIS: Under existing law, a person judged to be
mentally incompetent cannot be tried or adjudged to
punishment. A defendant is mentally incompetent if, as a
CONTINUED
AB
145
Page 2
result of mental disorder or developmental disability, the
defendant is unable to understand the nature of the
criminal proceedings or to assist counsel in the conduct of
a defense in a rational manner.
The court must order a defendant found to be mentally
incompetent to be delivered to a state hospital. If, after
the maximum determinant sentence for the crime with which
they are charged, or three years, whichever is shorter, the
defendant has not regained mental competence, the defendant
must be returned to the committing court.
Upon return, the court must order the initiation of
conservatorship proceedings, if the court finds that the
defendant is "gravely disabled", which is defined as a
condition in which a person has been found mentally
incompetent to stand trial and all of the following facts
exist:
1. The defendant was charged with a felony involving
death, great bodily harm or a serious threat to the
physical well-being of another person.
2. The charge has not been dismissed.
3. As a result of a mental disorder, the person is unable
to understand the nature and purposes of the proceedings
taken against him or her and to assist counsel in the
conduct of his or her defense in a rational manner.
Defendants placed into conservatorship under these
provisions are known as "Murphy conservatees."
There are a number of provisions in the Welfare and
Institutions Code specifying the powers and obligations of
conservatees of gravely disabled persons, and therefore to
Murphy conservatees. Murphy conservatorships are also
governed by the general conservatorship statutes in the
Probate Code.
Under these provisions, a conservator must place a
conservatee in the least restrictive alternative placement.
If the conservatee is not to be placed in his or her home,
CONTINUED
AB
145
Page 3
there is a list of priorities for where the conservator may
place the conservatee.
This bill establishes a number of special requirements
applicable only to Murphy conservatees in order to protect
the public.
The bill requires the court, rather than the conservator,
to determine the most appropriate placement for a Murphy
conservatee, and provides that the court's priorities in
making this decision should be to place the conservatee in
a facility that achieves the purposes of treatment of the
conservatee and protection of the public.
The bill would prohibit release of a Murphy conservatee
without a hearing and court approval. The district
attorney could request a hearing within 10 days of
receiving notification of the requested release. The bill
limits the frequency with which hearings may be granted for
the purpose of determining the placement of the conservatee
to once every six months.
The court would determine those persons to be notified of a
change of placement, and the conservator would be required
to notify the district attorney or attorney representing
the originating county prior to any change of placement,
except in cases of transfers between state hospitals.
When the defendant is confined in a treatment facility, the
bill requires the committing court to send a copy of any
report regarding the defendant's progress toward recovery
of mental competence to the prosecutor and defense counsel.
The bill requires that notice be given to the committing
court, the district attorney, and governmental law
enforcement agencies (as designated by the physician in
charge of the patient) within 24 hours of the patient's
disappearance or removal from a facility.
Background on Murphy conservatees
Individuals found incompetent to stand trial are placed in
CONTINUED
AB
145
Page 4
state hospitals. Most of these individuals are restored to
competence and tried, referred to local mental health for
evaluation and treatment, or released. A few, however,
remain in state hospitals for long enough to be returned to
the court for a determination as to whether they should be
placed into a Murphy conservatorship.
Currently, there are approximately 56 Murphy conservatees
in state hospitals. All of these individuals would have
completed their sentences by now if they had been found to
be competent to stand trial.
Prior Legislation
AB 156X (Rogan) 1994, died without referral from the Senate
Rules Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/24/95)
Los Angeles District Attorney
California District Attorneys Association
Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: This bill was introduced in
response to a situation which came to light after the
random killing in 1991, of a Burbank woman by a man who was
later found mentally incompetent to stand trial.
In spite of the district attorney's request that a public
agency be appointed as conservator for the defendant, the
court appointed the defendant's sister as his conservator.
The only protection the court provided to the public,
according to the author, was the requirement that the
conservator notify the district attorney and the public
defender if she changed the defendant's location.
As a result, the author believes the law should be changed
to adequately ensure the protection of the public from such
a conservatee, by requiring notice of a change in the
conservatee's status and court authorization to remove a
CONTINUED
AB
145
Page 5
conservatee from a locked setting.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR:
AYES: Aguiar, Alby, Alpert, Baca, Baldwin, Battin, Boland,
Bordonaro, Bowen, Bowler, Brewer, V. Brown, Brulte,
Burton, Bustamante, Caldera, Cannella, Conroy, Cortese,
Cunneen, Davis, Ducheny, Figueroa, Firestone, Friedman,
Frusetta, Gallegos, Goldsmith, Granlund, Hannigan,
Harvey, Hauser, Hawkins, Hoge, House, Isenberg,
Kaloogian, Katz, Knight, Knowles, Knox, Kuehl,
Kuykendall, Machado, Martinez, Mazzoni, McDonald,
McPherson, Miller, Morrissey, Morrow, Napolitano, Olberg,
Poochigian, Pringle, Rainey, Richter, Rogan, Setencich,
Sher, Speier, Sweeney, Takasugi, Thompson, Tucker,
Vasconcellos, Villaraigosa, Weggeland, Woods, W. Brown
CONTINUED
AB
145
Page 6
NOES: Bates
NOT VOTING: Allen, Archie-Hudson, Campbell, Escutia, Lee,
K. Murray, W. Murray
RJG:sl 8/24/95 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED