Error and/or relief
The defendant was not advised of her right to a jury trial on the prosecution’s petition for extension of her commitment under a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity, and she did not personally waive that right. Therefore, her commitment must be reversed.
First Holding:
A defendant who is found not guilty by reason of insanity may be committed to a state hospital for a term equal to the maximum sentence the court could have imposed for the underlying offense. A person’s commitment may be extended beyond the maximum sentence, however, if certain procedures are followed.
When the petition to extend the commitment is filed, the court shall advise the person named in the petition of the right to be represented by an attorney and of the right to a jury trial. The court shall conduct a hearing on the petition for extended commitment. The trial shall be by jury unless waived by both the person and the prosecuting attorney.
Authority:
PEN 1026.5
Second Holding:
The statutory language is unambiguous–the person named in the petition has the right to a jury trial, and the trial shall be by jury unless the person named in the petition waives said right.
Authority:
People v. Tran (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1160, 1166
Third Holding:
In the present case, there is nothing in the record showing the trial court advised appellant of her right to a jury trial, obtained a personal waiver from her, or made an explicit finding of substantial evidence that she lacked the capacity to make a knowing and voluntary waiver. Instead, the court accepted defense counsel’s waiver of a jury trial without any advisements or personal waivers or findings. The record offers no explanation. Under these circumstances, there is no basis to infer appellant personally waived her right to a jury trial from the silent record. Therefore, the jury trial waiver is invalid.
Authority:
People v. Tran (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1160, 1168-1169