People v. Yamburg CA6

Filed 1/15/25 P. v. Yamburg CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H051520, H051700 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. C2100886)

v.

LEONID S. YAMBURG,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT1 Leonid S. Yamburg appeals from orders declaring him incompetent to stand trial (Pen. Code, § 13682), committing him to the Department of State Hospitals for placement in a psychiatric facility for a maximum of two years (§ 1370, subd. (a)(2)), and denying his request to substitute his appointed counsel (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden)). For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the orders. I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND3 In January 2021, the Santa Clara County District Attorney filed a felony complaint charging Yamburg with two counts of murder (§ 187) with special circumstances

Before Greenwood, P. J., Danner, J., and Bromberg, J. 1

Subsequent undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 3 Except to provide context for the procedural background, we omit a detailed discussion of the facts of the offense as they are not relevant to the analysis and disposition of the appeal.

allegations of multiple murders in the same proceeding (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)), after Yamburg appeared at the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety and reported that he killed his wife earlier that morning. Reporting officers found Yamburg’s deceased wife and daughter at his home. At a hearing on Yamburg’s request to represent himself under Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806, the trial court declared a doubt as to Yamburg’s competency to stand trial pursuant to section 1368, following an in camera hearing with Yamburg and his attorney. The court appointed Rami Mogannam, Ph.D. to evaluate Yamburg’s competency. Mogannam filed a report in November 2021. The court thereafter appointed John M. Greene, M.D., to undertake a second evaluation, the report from which the trial court received in April 2022. In August 2022, the trial court appointed a prosecution-retained expert, Lyn J. Mangiameli, Ph.D., to conduct an additional evaluation of Yamburg’s competency. Mangiameli filed a report in May 2023. While these evaluations were being completed, Yamburg made three requests to substitute his appointed attorney, pursuant to Marsden. The trial court denied each request after holding a hearing.4 In May 2023, the court appointed Lindsay Meyer, Ph.D. to conduct another evaluation of Yamburg’s competency. Meyer filed a report in September 2023. After counsel submitted on the reports, the trial court determined that Yamburg was not competent to stand trial. Yamburg timely filed a notice of appeal from the order, which is appealable as a final judgment in a special proceeding, designated by this court as