Six months later, while the defendant is not in custody and not present at his Competency Hearing(at direction of his court appointed counsel), finds the defendant incompetent to proceed and enters an order committing the defendant.
The court takes no other action, allows court appointed counsel to withdraw, permits the continued release of the defendant without supervision. Years pass.
What is wrong with this scenario?The last hearing in which the defendant was present was prior to his release on bail. It was a preliminary Nelson hearing,to hear his motion to discharge his court appointed attorney complaining procedures were not being followed by the court. After this hearing, the court appointed 2 experts to examine the defendant. The issue of competency had been raised 2 months earlier. The court had granted the motion for a Competency Hearing, but the hearing date had not been set nor had experts been appointed to examine the defendant. The subsequent psychiatric examination of the defendant after his release on bail, proferred the defendant was incompetent to proceed, had above average intelligence, understanding of court procedure, but an inability to form a relationship with court appointed counsel(defendant thought him as incompetent) and delusional beliefs that the Judge in this case "did not know one paragraph of the law".
Well, there are a lot of things wrong with this scenario. The most obvious is that the court committed the defendant but permitted his continued release. Commitment usually means the defendant is going to be sent to the state hospital involuntarily. This typically happens pretty quickly after the commitment (within a few weeks). I also have concerns that the court allowed counsel to withdraw thereby leaving the defendant without counsel. I am not really sure what happened here or what result you are seeking.
Years licensed, work experience, education
Peer endorsements, associations, awards
Publications, speaking engagements