People v. Mitchell CA4/4

Filed 6/30/14 P. v. Mitchell CA4/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A137791 v. LAMAR V. MITCHELL, (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. C144612) Defendant and Appellant.

Lamar V. Mitchell appeals from an order denying his request for conditional release for outpatient treatment pursuant to Penal Code,1 section 1603. He contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his request because his treatment providers unanimously agreed that he was suitable for outpatient status. We affirm. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On December 11, 2003, the court found defendant not guilty by reason of insanity (§ 1026) of second degree murder. The offense occurred on June 26, 2002, when defendant attacked Roysel Marshall-Darrow, and fatally stabbed him with a knife. Defendant had not previously met Marshall-Darrow. On January 22, 2004, the court ordered defendant committed to the Napa State Hospital for a term of life. On November 15, 2012, the Napa State Hospital notified the court that defendant was no longer a danger to the health and safety of others and recommended that he be released for outpatient treatment under the Alameda County Conditional Release

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

Program (CONREP) pursuant to sections 1603 and 1604. The court held a hearing pursuant to section 1604, subdivision (c) on January 18 and 25, 2013. The following evidence was presented. 1. Dr. Eytam Bercovitch Dr. Eytam Bercovitch, a staff psychologist at Napa State Hospital, testified as an expert in risk assessment and readiness for conditional release. For the past four years, Bercovitch had been a part of defendant’s treatment team and generally saw him on a daily basis. He met with defendant in individual meetings, group therapy, treatment planning conferences, and team meetings with defendant’s psychiatrist, social worker, and the treating therapist. Bercovitch testified that defendant first began having symptoms when he was about 15 years old and was first hospitalized at age 17. He was diagnosed as having paranoid schizophrenia and prescribed antipsychotic medication. He was treated on an outpatient basis, but he was involuntarily committed several times including after a suicide attempt. In the month prior to committing the murder, defendant had stopped taking his medications because he became convinced that he was no longer mentally ill. In a visit to his treatment providers, eight days prior to the murder, he told the staff that things were going well for him and that all he needed was to renew his medication prescriptions. After the murder, defendant reported that he had been experiencing increased psychotic symptoms in the period prior to the murder, and he heard voices telling him he was in danger and had to defend himself. In October 2012, defendant’s team concluded that he was ready to leave Napa State Hospital. CONREP also evaluated defendant and determined that he was ready to be released to their program. Bercovitch along with defendant’s psychiatrist, Dr. Margaret Miller, prepared the report recommending defendant for CONREP (the Bercovitch report). He found