P. v. Miler CA6

Filed 7/26/13 P. v. Miler CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, H038842 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. CC627089)

v.

DONALD THOMAS MILLER,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Donald Thomas Miller appeals after the trial court granted the District Attorney‟s petition to extend defendant‟s commitment under the outpatient conditional release program (CONREP), pursuant to Penal Code section 1606.1 Defendant contends insufficient evidence supports the trial court‟s determination that, due to a mental disorder or illness, defendant would be dangerous if unconditionally released. As substantial evidence supports the trial court‟s findings, we will affirm the order extending defendant‟s outpatient commitment.

BACKGROUND On June 22, 2012, the District Attorney filed a petition to extend defendant‟s outpatient commitment, pursuant to section 1606. The petition alleged that defendant had been committed to Atascadero State Hospital on August 1, 2007, after he was found not

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless stated otherwise.

guilty, by reason of insanity, of a violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(1). (See §§ 1026, 1026.5.) The petition alleged that defendant had been released on outpatient status to South Bay CONREP on July 23, 2010 (see §§ 1600, 1604), and that his commitment was set to expire on July 23, 2012, but that he continued “to represent a substantial danger of physical harm to others without the care and supervision” of the CONREP program. A report from the CONREP program was filed with the petition. The report contained information about defendant‟s criminal offenses, mental health history, and treatment progress. According to the report, defendant‟s underlying offense was an assault with a knife committed on April 19, 2006; the victim was defendant‟s 72-year-old father. Defendant, who suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, had been “influenced by a paranoid delusion that his life was in danger.” Defendant believed that his father was his enemy and that robots were shooting at him. Defendant, who had a prior history of psychotic episodes and involuntary commitments, was not taking psychiatric medications at the time of the offense. According to the report, defendant had “participated actively in his treatment at Atascadero State Hospital.” He was granted outpatient status because he was “no longer presenting with psychotic symptoms and [had] completed a relapse prevention plan.” Defendant had begun to accept his mental illness and need for medications, and he was able to identify “potential high-risk situations and early warning signs” of psychiatric problems. The report described instances in which defendant continued to experience delusions and paranoia. He had reported feeling “ „magical‟ ” after an odd dream, and he had reported “thinking about his prior enemies.” He needed assistance from CONREP staff “to prevent escalation to delusional symptoms.” He continued to require “support with understanding his symptoms and implementing coping skills.” In particular, he needed to avoid exposure to media and literature featuring fantasy due to his “significant