P. v. F.B.
Filed 3/5/13 P. v. F.B. CA4/1
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts
and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or
ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
COURT
OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
ONE
STATE
OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
F.B.,
Defendant and Appellant.
D062557
(Super. Ct.
Nos. SCE236759 &
MH107539)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of
County, Dwayne K. Moring, Judge. Affirmed.
A complaint
filed in May 2012, charged F.B. with assault
with a deadly weapon with personal use of a deadly weapon (Pen. Code,
§§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 1192.7, subd. (c)(23); all further statutory
references are to this code) and vandalism (§ 594, subds. (a), (b)(1)),
and alleged she had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). In August, the court found F.B. was not
mentally competent to stand trial and lacked capacity to give or withhold
informed consent to the administration of
State Hospital
for a maximum term of three years and authorized involuntary administration of
antipsychotic medication. F.B.
appeals. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
The
complaint alleged that on May 24, 2012,
F.B. assaulted the victim with a metal broom and committed vandalism causing at
least $400 in damage. In July, a
psychiatrist evaluated F.B. and reported she was delusional and unable to carry
on a rational conversation. She
exhibited an illogical thought process and behaved in a bizarre, psychotic
manner. She suffered from bipolar
disorder and cocaine dependence. The psychiatrist
determined F.B.'s mental disorder required treatment with antipsychotic
medication, she would benefit from the medication, the medication was in her
best medical interest, she lacked the capacity to make decisions regarding the
medication, there were no alternative treatments and the treatment was likely
to restore her to competence. The
psychiatrist concluded F.B. did not have an adequate understanding of the
nature of the proceedings against her and could not assist her attorney in a
rational manner in her own defense. He
recommended she be referred to a state hospital for restoration to
competency.
DISCUSSION
Appointed
appellate counsel has filed a brief summarizing the proceedings below. Counsel presents no argument for reversal,
but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
Pursuant to Anders v. California
(1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel lists, as possible, but not arguable, issues: whether the court abused its discretion by
finding F.B. incompetent to stand trial, and in authorizing involuntary
administration of antipsychotic medication.
We granted
F.B. permission to file a brief on her own behalf. She has not responded. A review of the record pursuant to
and Anders v. California, supra, 386
U.S. 738, including the possible issues listed pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no
reasonably arguable appellate issues. F.B.
has been competently represented by counsel on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
McINTYRE,
J.
WE CONCUR:
HALLER, Acting P. J.
IRION, J.
