California Court of Appeal

In a case in which defendant's was found by the trial court to be mentally competent to stand trial, his convictions of lewd acts with a child under the age of 14 years, Pen. Code section 288(a), and oral copulation with a child under the age of 10 years, section 288.7(b), are reversed where: 1) based on California Supreme Court opinions beginning with People v. Pennington (1967) 66 Cal.2d 508, the issue before the trial court was whether the expert's testimony was sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to defendant's competence and thus triggered his constitutional right to a full competency hearing, not whether defendant was or was not mentally competent; 2) the evidence was sufficient to raise such a doubt; and 3) because a trial court has no power to proceed with the trial once a doubt arises as to the sanity of the defendant, the error is prejudicial per se.

Appellate Information

• Published 2016/11/28

Judges

• McKINSTER

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel