HOUSE BILL REPORT
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent.
As Reported by House Committee On:
Title: An act relating to criminal incompetency and civil commitment.
Brief Description: Addressing criminal incompetency and civil commitment.
Sponsors: Senate Committee on Human Services & Corrections (originally sponsored by Senators Hargrove, Carrell and Hewitt).
Judiciary: 3/13/13, 3/27/13 [DPA].
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Majority Report: Do pass as amended. Signed by 11 members: Representatives Pedersen, Chair; Hansen, Vice Chair; Rodne, Ranking Minority Member; O'Ban, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Hope, Jinkins, Kirby, Klippert, Nealey, Orwall and Roberts.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 2 members: Representatives Goodman and Shea.
Staff: Omeara Harrington (786-7136).
A person is incompetent to stand trial in a criminal case if he or she lacks the capacity to understand the nature of the proceedings or is unable to assist in his or her own defense. A court may require a competency evaluation of a defendant whenever the issue of competency is raised, and a person who is incompetent may not be tried, convicted, or sentenced for a criminal offense as long as the incompetency continues.
If a person is found incompetent to stand trial, the court must stay the criminal proceedings and, depending on the charged offense, either order a period of treatment for restoration of competency, or dismiss the charges without prejudice. If the defendant undergoes restoration but cannot be restored to competency within the designated time period, the criminal case must be dismissed without prejudice.
Evaluations and Petitions for Involuntary Treatment.
If a person's competency is not restored and charges have been dismissed, the person will be considered for commitment in the civil system. The Involuntary Treatment Act (ITA) sets forth the procedures, rights, and requirements for an involuntary civil commitment. After the court dismisses felony charges, the person must be released or transferred to a hospital or secure mental health facility for up to 72 hours for purposes of an involuntary treatment evaluation. At the end of the 72-hour evaluation period a petition may be filed for up to 180 additional days of treatment.
Grounds for Involuntary Treatment Following a Felony Dismissal.
A person who has had felony charges dismissed due to incompetency may be detained for a period of up to 180 days if the petitioner can prove by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that the person has committed acts constituting a felony and, as a result of a mental disorder, the person presents a substantial likelihood of repeating similar acts. If the grounds for commitment have been proven, but treatment less restrictive than detention will be in the best interest of the person or others, the court may order a less restrictive alternative placement for the term of commitment.
No order of commitment under the ITA may exceed 180 days, but commitment may be renewed upon successive petitions and hearings. The grounds on subsequent petitions match those for the initial petition for commitment, but additional factors are considered in the analysis of likelihood of repeating similar acts, including life history, progress in treatment, and the public safety. The person may be released prior to the end of the term of commitment if they no longer meet the commitment criteria.
Commitment of a Person Found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.
A person may be committed as "criminally insane" if the person is found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) and the fact finder determines that the person presents a substantial likelihood of committing criminal acts jeopardizing public safety or security unless kept under further control by the court, other persons, or institutions. Insanity in a criminal case means that the person was, at the time of the act underlying the charge, unable to perceive the nature and quality of the act or unable to tell right from wrong with respect to the particular act because of a mental disease or defect. The maximum term of commitment following an NGRI acquittal is equal to the maximum possible sentence for any offense charged against the person committed. A person committed as criminally insane may petition for conditional release or final release by making an application to the Secretary of the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS), or by making a direct petition to the court.
Release of Involuntarily Committed People.
The DSHS must give advance written notice of a change in a committed person's commitment status to the chief of police and sheriff in the person's jurisdiction of residence, and to victims and witnesses who have requested notice. Notice is required at least 30 days prior to release, authorized leave, or transfer to another facility, or immediately upon escape, of a person who is committed after a dismissal of a sex, violent, or felony harassment offense.
Legislation in 2010 created a public safety review panel to independently review and assess the DSHS proposals for conditional release, furlough, temporary leave, and similar changes in commitment status of people found NGRI. The panel provides written determinations of the public safety risk presented by any release recommendation, and may offer alternative recommendations. The panel's recommendations are submitted to the court with the DSHS recommendations.
The panel must submit a report to the Legislature by December 1, 2014, regarding observed changes in statewide consistency of evaluations and decisions concerning changes in the commitment status of persons found NGRI. The panel's report will also address whether the panel should be given the authority to make release decisions and monitor release conditions.
Summary of Amended Bill:
Evaluations for Involuntary Treatment.
For criminal defendants who have had felony charges dismissed due to incompetency, evaluation for the purposes of filing a civil commitment petition under the ITA must occur at a state hospital. Court discretion to release a defendant who has had felony charges dismissed is eliminated.
Grounds and Procedures for Involuntary Treatment Following a Violent Felony Dismissal.
On an initial petition for commitment of a person who has had a violent felony charge dismissed due to incompetency, in addition to the standard criteria for commitment, the court must make a finding as to whether the acts the person committed constitute a violent offense as defined in statute.
On subsequent petitions for continued commitment of a person who has had a violent felony charge dismissed, when the court has made the additional finding at the initial petition, the person will be committed for up to an additional 180 days upon prima facie evidence that the person continues to suffer from a mental disorder or developmental disability that results in a substantial likelihood that the person will commit acts similar to the criminal behavior. The committed person may challenge the renewed commitment with an admissible expert opinion indicating that their condition has changed such that the mental disorder or developmental disability no longer presents a substantial likelihood that they will commit acts similar to the charged criminal behavior. Additional terms of commitment may include transfer to a specialized intensive support and treatment program, which may be initiated prior to or after release from the state hospital.
Release of Involuntarily Committed People.
The prosecuting attorney of the county in which the criminal charges against the committed person were dismissed is entitled to notice of impending release, change in commitment status, or escape of a person involuntarily committed after dismissal of a sex, violent, or felony harassment offense.
The jurisdiction of the independent public safety review panel is expanded to require the panel to provide advice regarding persons committed under the ITA where the court has made an additional finding that person committed acts constituting a violent offense. In particular, the panel must review all decisions to change the person's commitment status, and decisions to seek or not to seek commitment. The panel's report to the Legislature will include recommendations as to whether further changes in the law are necessary to enhance public safety when incompetency prevents the operation of the criminal justice system.
When a person committed as criminally insane submits a direct petition for release to the court, the petition must be served upon the court, the prosecuting attorney, and the Secretary of the DSHS. Upon receipt of service, the Secretary must determine whether reasonable grounds exist for release and provide the recommendation to all parties and the court.
When filing a release petition for a person committed as criminally insane who will be transferred upon release to a correctional facility to serve a sentence for a class A felony, the petitioner must show that the person's mental disease or defect is manageable within a correctional facility, but need not prove that the person does not present a substantial danger to other persons or a substantial likelihood of committing criminal acts that jeopardize public safety or security if released.
Amended Bill Compared to Engrossed Substitute Bill:
A striking amendment replaced Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) 5176 with Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill (E2SSB) 1114, and retained one section of ESSB 5176. The effect was as follows:
Some sections of ESSB 5176 were removed entirely, specifically those regarding: (1) permitting pre-transport screening of in-custody defendants who have had serious misdemeanors dismissed due to incompetency; (2) eliminating the provisions in current law requiring a 48 hour hold for judicial review when an ITA petition is not filed for someone who has had a misdemeanor dismissed due to incompetency; and (3) requiring notice to the prosecutor and defense attorney when an ITA petition is not filed for someone who has had a serious misdemeanor or felony dismissed due to incompetency.
Some sections of ESSB 5176 were replaced with different, but corresponding, provisions of E2SHB 1114. The section outlining the alternative process for commitment of a person found at the initial petition to have committed a violent offense was replaced with language that calls for a successive petition process rather than a review process. The intent section and the section regarding oversight by the independent public safety review panel are worded to comport with other language in E2SHB 1114.
The striking amendment incorporated one section of ESSB 5176 that was not in E2SHB 1114. That section adds procedural requirements to the petition process when a person committed as NGRI directly petitions the court for review, and modifies standards for release of a person from NGRI commitment who will be transferred to a correctional facility to serve a sentence for a class A felony.
Fiscal Note: Available. New fiscal note requested on March 27, 2013.
Effective Date of Amended Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of the session in which the bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
(In support) This bill is designed to address gap cases. The proposed process is preferable to having these cases repeatedly cycle through state hospitals over the course of years. This bill and the House of Representatives (House) companion are very similar in substance, but the language of the House version is preferred. In both versions, the default is that a term of commitment will end after 180 days, but that is clearer in the House version, and the House version offers a less restrictive alternative to inpatient commitment.
The original bill required a state hospital to conduct all evaluations in misdemeanor dismissal cases. The actual fiscal impact would be lower than the estimate. The statute should be amended to allow these evaluations to take place at an evaluation and treatment facility or a state hospital to maximize the number of beds available for evaluations. Currently, some evaluations are ordered to take place at Harborview. The hospital is a poor place for evaluations, and there is no Regional Support Network control or responsibility for these beds. More funding should be dedicated to this issue. The pre-transfer screening language needs to be clarified.
(With concerns) This legislation is not in the Governor's budget proposal. Allowing misdemeanor evaluations to occur at the state hospitals is necessary; otherwise Western State Hospital will not accept any evaluations, which results in people being sent to the emergency room. However, it also creates problems in that the beds are already used for competency evaluations, the ITA commitment, and NGRI commitment. It is important to avoid transferring people who do not meet the commitment criteria, but the screening mechanism is problematic because screening would take place in the jails. This could lead to liability issues.
The House version of the bill is preferable, and the House amendment regarding the less restrictive alternative to inpatient treatment in gap cases should be incorporated.
(Other) Adding language indicating that state hospitals can evaluate people who have had serious misdemeanors dismissed would add flexibility and clarity. Additional funding for beds is needed. People have been denied evaluations and released, which presents issues in terms of providing care and maintaining public safety.
(Opposed) The procedural aspects of the bill create constitutional concerns by removing rights to trial by judge or jury and shifting the burden of proof to the committed person. The standard of proof for commitment is lowered from clear and convincing evidence to a prima facie showing. There will be indefinite commitment for felony dismissal cases. Necessary methods of defense will create backlog in the courts, and challenges to the law will be costly. The public safety review panel process will create further delays. This proposal will cost millions of dollars, and will warehouse rather than treat.
Persons Testifying: (In support) Tom McBride, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys; Seth Dawson, National Alliance on Mental Illness; and Darcy Jaffe, Harborview Medical Center.
(With concerns) Jane Beyer, Department of Social and Health Services; and Amnon Shoenfeld, King County Regional Support Networks.
(Other) Lisa Thatcher, Washington State Hospital Association; and Kelsey Beck, King County.
(Opposed) Ruth Martin, Citizens Commission on Human Rights; and Mike De Felice, The Defenders Association.
Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None.