P. v. McDonough
Appellant Marie Chantal McDonough, who had been committed to the state hospital as a result of having been found not guilty by reason of insanity in a felony prosecution. Eight years later, the director of the Metropolitan State Hospital filed a semiannual report recommending appellant be placed in outpatient treatment. (Pen. Code, § 1603, subd. (a)(1); all statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated.) The superior court held a hearing on the matter and denied appellant outpatient treatment. In a published opinion we reversed “because the trial court did not find appellant is currently mentally ill and dangerous, and denied outpatient status because it did not find the treatment program appropriate.†(People v. McDonough (2012) 196 Cal.App.4th 1472, 1493.) We directed the trial court on remand to consider the evidence from the trial, any other relevant evidence the parties may offer, and determine whether appellant carried her burden by a preponderance of the evidence and is entitled to outpatient treatment. (Ibid.)
The parties offered no new evidence on remand. The trial court reviewed the evidence from the first hearing and again denied outpatient treatment, finding appellant to be currently dangerous.
I
Comments on P. v. McDonough