BILL REQ. #:  H-0954.2 

Read first time 02/01/13.   Referred to Committee on Judiciary.

     AN ACT Relating to competency to stand trial evaluations; and amending RCW 10.77.060 and 10.77.068.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

Sec. 1   RCW 10.77.060 and 2012 c 256 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1)(a) Whenever a defendant has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, or there is reason to doubt his or her competency, the court on its own motion or on the motion of any party shall either: (i) Appoint a qualified expert or professional person, whom the prosecuting attorney shall approve, to evaluate and report upon the mental condition of the defendant; or (ii) request the secretary to designate a qualified expert or professional person, who shall be approved by the prosecuting attorney, to evaluate and report upon the mental condition of the defendant.
     (b) The signed order of the court shall serve as authority for the evaluator to be given access to all records held by any mental health, medical, educational, or correctional facility that relate to the present or past mental, emotional, or physical condition of the defendant. If the court is advised by any party that the defendant may have a developmental disability, the evaluation must be performed by a developmental disabilities professional.
     (c) The evaluator shall assess the defendant in a jail, detention facility, in the community, or in court to determine whether a period of inpatient commitment will be necessary to complete an accurate evaluation. If inpatient commitment is needed, the signed order of the court shall serve as authority for the evaluator to request the jail or detention facility to transport the defendant to a hospital or secure mental health facility for a period of commitment not to exceed fifteen days from the time of admission to the facility. Otherwise, the evaluator shall complete the evaluation.
     (d) The court may commit the defendant for evaluation to a hospital or secure mental health facility without an assessment if: (i) The defendant is charged with murder in the first or second degree; (ii) the court finds that it is more likely than not that an evaluation in the jail will be inadequate to complete an accurate evaluation; or (iii) the court finds that an evaluation outside the jail setting is necessary for the health, safety, or welfare of the defendant. The court shall not order an initial inpatient evaluation for any purpose other than a competency evaluation.
     (e) The order shall indicate whether, in the event the defendant is committed to a hospital or secure mental health facility for evaluation, all parties agree to waive the presence of the defendant or to the defendant's remote participation at a subsequent competency hearing or presentation of an agreed order if the recommendation of the evaluator is for continuation of the stay of criminal proceedings, or if the opinion of the evaluator is that the defendant remains incompetent and there is no remaining restoration period, and the hearing is held prior to the expiration of the authorized commitment period.
     (f) When a defendant is ordered to be committed for inpatient evaluation under this subsection (1), the court may delay granting bail until the defendant has been evaluated for competency or sanity and appears before the court. Following the evaluation, in determining bail the court shall consider: (i) Recommendations of the evaluator regarding the defendant's competency, sanity, or diminished capacity; (ii) whether the defendant has a recent history of one or more violent acts; (iii) whether the defendant has previously been acquitted by reason of insanity or found incompetent; (iv) whether it is reasonably likely the defendant will fail to appear for a future court hearing; and (v) whether the defendant is a threat to public safety.
     (2) The court may direct that a qualified expert or professional person retained by or appointed for the defendant be permitted to witness the evaluation authorized by subsection (1) of this section, and that the defendant shall have access to all information obtained by the court appointed experts or professional persons. The defendant's expert or professional person shall have the right to file his or her own report following the guidelines of subsection (3) of this section. If the defendant is indigent, the court shall upon the request of the defendant assist him or her in obtaining an expert or professional person.
     (3) The report of the evaluation shall include the following:
     (a) A description of the nature of the evaluation;
     (b) A diagnosis or description of the current mental status of the defendant;
     (c) If the defendant suffers from a mental disease or defect, or has a developmental disability, an opinion as to competency;
     (d) If the defendant has indicated his or her intention to rely on the defense of insanity pursuant to RCW 10.77.030, and an evaluation and report by an expert or professional person has been provided concluding that the defendant was criminally insane at the time of the alleged offense, an opinion as to the defendant's sanity at the time of the act, and an opinion as to whether the defendant presents a substantial danger to other persons, or presents a substantial likelihood of committing criminal acts jeopardizing public safety or security, unless kept under further control by the court or other persons or institutions, provided that no opinion shall be rendered under this subsection (3)(d) unless the evaluator or court determines that the defendant is competent to stand trial;
     (e) When directed by the court, if an evaluation and report by an expert or professional person has been provided concluding that the defendant lacked the capacity at the time of the offense to form the mental state necessary to commit the charged offense, an opinion as to the capacity of the defendant to have a particular state of mind which is an element of the offense charged;
     (f) An opinion as to whether the defendant should be evaluated by a designated mental health professional under chapter 71.05 RCW.
     (4) The secretary may execute such agreements as appropriate and necessary to implement this section and may choose to designate more than one evaluator.

Sec. 2   RCW 10.77.068 and 2012 c 256 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1)(a) The legislature establishes the following performance targets for the timeliness of the completion of accurate and reliable evaluations of competency to stand trial and admissions for inpatient services related to competency to proceed or stand trial for adult criminal defendants. The legislature ((recognizes that these targets may not be achievable in all cases without compromise to quality of evaluation services, but)) intends for the department to manage, allocate, and request appropriations for resources in order to meet these targets whenever possible without sacrificing the accuracy of competency evaluations, and to otherwise make sustainable improvements and track performance related to the timeliness of competency services:
     (i) For a state hospital to extend an offer of admission to a defendant in pretrial custody for legally authorized treatment or evaluation services related to competency, or to extend an offer of admission for legally authorized services following dismissal of charges based on incompetent to proceed or stand trial, seven days or less;
     (ii) For completion of a competency evaluation in jail and distribution of the evaluation report for a defendant in pretrial custody, seven days or less;
     (iii) For completion of a competency evaluation in the community and distribution of the evaluation report for a defendant who is released from custody and makes a reasonable effort to cooperate with the evaluation, twenty-one days or less.
     (b) The time periods measured in these performance targets shall run from the date on which the state hospital receives the court referral and charging documents, discovery, and criminal history information related to the defendant. The targets in (a)(i) and (ii) of this subsection shall be phased in over a six-month period from May 1, 2012. The target in (a)(iii) of this subsection shall be phased in over a twelve-month period from May 1, 2012.
     (c) It is the responsibility of the court to ensure the timely completion of accurate and reliable evaluations of competency to stand trial in accordance with this section to each person, charged with a crime. If in any six-month time period, the state hospital has not met the performance targets for timely completion of competency evaluations and restorations of competency in order to stand trial in fifty percent of cases submitted by any one county, the court of that county shall appoint a qualified expert or professional person, whom the prosecuting attorney shall approve, to evaluate and report upon the mental condition of the defendant. An expert or professional person appointed by the court for an indigent person pursuant to the provisions of this chapter must be compensated for his or her services out of funds of the department, in an amount determined by the department to be fair and reasonable.
     (d) The legislature recognizes the following nonexclusive list of circumstances that may place achievement of targets for completion of competency services described in (a) of this subsection out of the department's reach in an individual case without aspersion to the efforts of the department:
     (i) Despite a timely request, the department has not received necessary medical clearance information regarding the current medical status of a defendant in pretrial custody for the purposes of admission to a state hospital;
     (ii) The individual circumstances of the defendant make accurate completion of an evaluation of competency to proceed or stand trial dependent upon review of medical history information which is in the custody of a third party and cannot be immediately obtained by the department. Completion of a competency evaluation shall not be postponed for procurement of medical history information which is merely supplementary to the competency determination;
     (iii) Completion of the referral is frustrated by lack of availability or participation by counsel, jail or court personnel, interpreters, or the defendant; or
     (iv) An unusual spike in the receipt of evaluation referrals or in the number of defendants requiring restoration services has occurred, causing temporary delays until the unexpected excess demand for competency services can be resolved.
     (2) The department shall:
     (a) Develop, document, and implement procedures to monitor the clinical status of defendants admitted to a state hospital for competency services that allow the state hospital to accomplish early discharge for defendants for whom clinical objectives have been achieved or may be achieved before expiration of the commitment period;
     (b) Investigate the extent to which patients admitted to a state hospital under this chapter overstay time periods authorized by law and take reasonable steps to limit the time of commitment to authorized periods; and
     (c) Establish written standards for the productivity of forensic evaluators and utilize these standards to internally review the performance of forensic evaluators.
     (3) Following any quarter in which a state hospital has failed to meet one or more of the performance targets in subsection (1) of this section after full implementation of the performance target, the department shall report to the executive and the legislature the extent of this deviation and describe any corrective action being taken to improve performance. This report must be made publicly available. An average may be used to determine timeliness under this subsection.
     (4) Beginning December 1, 2013, the department shall report annually to the legislature and the executive on the timeliness of services related to competency to proceed or stand trial and the timeliness with which court referrals accompanied by charging documents, discovery, and criminal history information are provided to the department relative to the signature date of the court order. The report must be in a form that is accessible to the public and that breaks down performance by county.
     (5) This section does not create any new entitlement or cause of action related to the timeliness of competency evaluations or admission for inpatient services related to competency to proceed or stand trial, nor can it form the basis for contempt sanctions under chapter 7.21 RCW or a motion to dismiss criminal charges.