1. Incompetent persons accused of criminal offenses cannot be tried.
2. Either a defendant’s attorney or a defendant can waive the issue of competence when they have sound strategic reasons for doing so.
3. If the evidence of a defendant’s guilt at trial is overwhelming, the defendant’s conviction will not be overturned on appeal if it is determined that the defendant was incompetent at the trial.
4. In California, Penal Code section 1370 governs competence procedures in felony cases, misdemeanor cases are covered by Penal Code sections 1367.1 and 1370.01, and incompetence due to developmental disability are set forth in Penal Code section 1370.1.
5. The court initiates competence proceedings by “declaring a doubt” about the defendant’s competence and conducting a competency hearing.
6. The judge need not offer defense counsel an opportunity to state whether counsel believes the defendant to be competent, but, if the judge orders that defense counsel state counsel’s belief regarding the defendant’s competence, counsel must respond.
7. If the defendant is pro per, the court has the discretion, based on the defendant’s degree of incompetence, to appoint an attorney to assist the defendant in the competence proceedings.
8. A court must accept an attorney’s opinion that a doubt exists about competence and must initiate competence proceedings in such a situation even if there is no objective substantial evidence of a doubt about a defendant’s competence.
9. The court can appoint an expert to evaluate the defendant and prepare a non-confidential opinion as to whether a doubt should be declared regarding the defendant’s competence.
10. A trial court can be reversed for erroneously declaring a doubt even if a competency hearing is actually conducted, but it is unlikely it will be reversed for failing to declare a doubt and failing to start competence proceedings.
11. If a doubt regarding the defendant’s competence is declared by the court in the middle of a jury trial, the jury must always be discharged.
12. Once a doubt regarding the defendant’s competence is declared by the court, all court proceedings are suspended.
13. Despite the fact that the judge that declared the doubt may have greater experience with the defendant and his case, there is no requirement that the competency hearing be conducted by the same judge that declared the doubt.
14. Since the technical psychological issues involved in a competency determination are best handled by a judge, a defendant has no right to a jury trial to determine competence.
15. Because a defendant who may be incompetent will often not be able to make a sound determination whether to insist on a jury trial, defense counsel can waive the defendant’s right to jury even over the defendant’s objection.
16. If the doubt was declared before the preliminary hearing, criminal proceedings resume as 0 of 60 for the preliminary hearing; if the doubt was declared after the preliminary hearing while the defendant was in a trial court, the clock is reset as 0 of 10 to commence trial.
17. If the defendant is found incompetent to stand trial, the court must “commit” the defendant to an inpatient or outpatient state mental facility for treatment to restore competence.
18. If the defendant consents to taking antipsychotic medication following his commitment, the court need make no order regarding the defendant’s medication.
19. The court can order that the defendant be given antipsychotic medication against his or her will only if the court finds that (1) the defendant lacks the capacity to decide whether taking medication is in his best interest; or (2) the defendant poses a danger to himself or others.
20. In ordering the defendant committed to receive treatment to restore competence, the court must specify the date after which the defendant can no longer be held involuntarily for treatment to restore competence.