People v. Movrich CA3
Filed 10/16/25 P. v. Movrich CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Placer) ----
THE PEOPLE, C102485
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 62200845)
v.
JEREMY VERNON MOVRICH,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Jeremy Vernon Movrich appeals from the trial court’s order authorizing the involuntary administration of medication. His appointed counsel submitted a brief pursuant to Conservatorship of Ben. C. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 529 (Ben C.). Under Ben C., upon the filing of an appellate brief that does not identify any arguable issues and the allowance of time for the defendant to file a supplemental brief, we may exercise our discretion to retain the appeal or dismiss it on our own motion. (Id. at p. 544, fns. 6, 7.) Counsel informed defendant of his right to file a supplemental brief but he has not done so. Consistent with Ben C., we will dismiss the appeal.
1
BACKGROUND In September 2024, a felony complaint charged defendant with making criminal threats (Pen. Code,1 § 422; count one) and resisting an executive officer (§ 69, subd. (a); count two). The complaint further alleged defendant suffered a single prior serious felony conviction and prior strike conviction. (§§ 667, subd. (a)(1), 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subd. (a).) On September 11, 2024, the trial court declared doubt as to defendant’s competency and ordered two doctors to evaluate defendant for competency and grave disability. On September 30, 2024, the Placer County Adult System of Care filed a petition for involuntary administration of psychotropic medication under section 2603. The petition attached a declaration of Dr. Dianne Collins, a psychiatrist, who diagnosed defendant with schizoaffective disorder. Dr. Collins opined that defendant was gravely disabled and lacked the capacity to refuse treatment. Dr. Collins explained that on September 12, 2024, defendant began refusing medication. When she attempted to talk with defendant as to why he was refusing medication, defendant talked in a rambling and disjointed manner about a girlfriend, being on a steamboat with another woman with three children, then being chained to a bed with a diaper, and being fondled and tortured. When Dr. Collins attempted to talk to defendant appropriately, he continued to ramble and became more agitated. Another mental health professional was similarly unsuccessful in redirecting defendant to appropriate conversation. Dr. Collins opined that defendant’s gravely disabled behavior was a consequence of his refusing treatment. Defendant had been incarcerated since May 2022 and during his incarceration he had been stabilized on medications. When stabilized, defendant was
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)