7 California opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Rellsgreen2 sentences2021(Carr I, supra, 11 Cal.App.5th 264, 266 ; Rells, supra, 22 Cal.4th at p. 868 .) The defendant must thereupon be returned to court for “further proceedings” (§1372, subd. (a)(2)(A)) and the court must notify the designated mental health officials “of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) Section 1372 addresses restoration of competency. 2021(Carr I, supra, 11 Cal.App.5th 264, 266 ; Rells, supra, 22 Cal.4th at p. 868 .) The defendant must thereupon be returned to court for “further proceedings” (§1372, subd. (a)(2)(A)) and the court must notify the designated mental health officials “of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) Section 1372 addresses restoration of competency. | 1 | 3 |
People v. Mixongreen2 sentences2000Although the statute does not expressly provide for a trial or hearing on competence if the question of restoration is contested, it does at one point refer to such a hearing, requiring that certain mental health officials be given notice “of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) In People v. Mixon (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 1471, 1478-1485 [ 275 Cal.Rptr. 817 ] (Mixon), the Court of Appeal held that a defendant certified as competent and returned to court is entitled to a hea 2000Although the statute does not expressly provide for a trial or hearing on competence if the question of restoration is contested, it does at one point refer to such a hearing, requiring that certain mental health officials be given notice “of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) In People v. Mixon (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 1471, 1478-1485 [ 275 Cal.Rptr. 817 ] (Mixon), the Court of Appeal held that a defendant certified as competent and returned to court is entitled to a hea | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re Taitano
green
2 sentences2021(See § 1372, subds. (c)–(e)12; Taitano, supra, 13 Cal.App.5th at p. 242 .) If neither party 12 Section 1372, subdivision (c), provides: “When a defendant is returned to court with a certification that competence has been regained, the court shall notify either the community program director, the county mental health director, or the regional center director and the Director of Developmental Services, as appropriate, of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) The restoration 2021(See § 1372, subds. (c)–(e)12; Taitano, supra, 13 Cal.App.5th at p. 242 .) If neither party 12 Section 1372, subdivision (c), provides: “When a defendant is returned to court with a certification that competence has been regained, the court shall notify either the community program director, the county mental health director, or the regional center director and the Director of Developmental Services, as appropriate, of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) The restoration | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Mounts v. Uyeda
green
1 sentence2023(People v. Luo (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 663, 680 .) We presume that the statute is valid; we resolve any doubts in favor of constitutionality; and we uphold the statute “unless it is in clear and unquestionable conflict with the state or federal Constitutions.” (Mounts v. Uyeda (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 111, 122 .) “A challenge to a statute’s constitutionality must demonstrate that its provisions inevitably pose a total and fatal conflict with applicable constitutional prohibitions”; therefore, “if the court can conceive of a situation in which the statute can be applied without entailing an inevitab | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Luo
green
1 sentence2023(People v. Luo (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 663, 680 .) We presume that the statute is valid; we resolve any doubts in favor of constitutionality; and we uphold the statute “unless it is in clear and unquestionable conflict with the state or federal Constitutions.” (Mounts v. Uyeda (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 111, 122 .) “A challenge to a statute’s constitutionality must demonstrate that its provisions inevitably pose a total and fatal conflict with applicable constitutional prohibitions”; therefore, “if the court can conceive of a situation in which the statute can be applied without entailing an inevitab | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Carr v. Superior Court of Contra Costa County
green
2 sentences2021(Carr I, supra, 11 Cal.App.5th 264, 266 ; Rells, supra, 22 Cal.4th at p. 868 .) The defendant must thereupon be returned to court for “further proceedings” (§1372, subd. (a)(2)(A)) and the court must notify the designated mental health officials “of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) Section 1372 addresses restoration of competency. 2021(Carr I, supra, 11 Cal.App.5th 264, 266 ; Rells, supra, 22 Cal.4th at p. 868 .) The defendant must thereupon be returned to court for “further proceedings” (§1372, subd. (a)(2)(A)) and the court must notify the designated mental health officials “of the date of any hearing on the defendant’s competence and whether or not the defendant was found by the court to have recovered competence.” (§ 1372, subd. (c).) Section 1372 addresses restoration of competency. | 1 | 2021–2021 |