WEIGHT: 58 kg
Sex services: Striptease amateur, Spanking (giving), Striptease, Tie & Tease, Extreme
CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project , a federally-recognized c 3 non-profit. We rely on donations for our financial security. Your Notes edit none. Authorities 18 This opinion cites: Please support our work with a donation. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. He contends the trial court committed reversible error when it allowed the prosecutor to question an expert psychiatric witness in front of the jury about the consequences of an incompetency verdict and later refused to suspend the proceedings for a second competency evaluation.
He also contends the court erred when it refused to sever the counts concerning one of his victims for a separate trial, and when it imposed consecutive sentences on all counts. Competency Defendant raises two distinct issues concerning his competence to stand trial. He contends that, during his competency trial, the court erroneously permitted the prosecutor to cross-examine an expert psychiatric witness about the possible legal consequences of a finding that he was mentally incompetent to stand trial.
He asserts the challenged questions suggested to the jury that if he were found incompetent he could evade punishment for his crimes, and therefore were unduly prejudicial. Defendant also argues the court erred when it later refused to hold a second competency hearing after he threatened, and allegedly attempted, to kill himself on the eve of trial.
Neither contention is persuasive. Background The court appointed two psychologists to evaluate defendant after his attorney declared a doubt about his competency. Psychologist Allan Solomon interviewed defendant for about 45 minutes.
Based on the current examination, the defendant is judged to be a danger to himself and to others. The defendant is judged most likely to be suffering from a psychotic disorder, possibly Schizoaffective Schizophrenia, and will require long term treatment. Prior to interviewing defendant he spoke with the prosecution and defense counsel and reviewed the order authorizing the evaluation, the police reports, the information, and Dr.