People v. Townsend CA5

Filed 9/25/15 P. v. Townsend CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F068927 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 13CRAD681819) v.

REBIO TOWNSEND, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Armando Rodriguez. (Retired Judge of the Fresno Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Paul Bernstein, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Julie Weng-Gutierrez, Assistant Attorney General, Ismael A. Castro and Renu R. George, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P. J., Poochigian, J. and Detjen, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellant Rebio Townsend appeals from an order requiring him to submit to involuntary administration of psychotropic medication. In his appeal, appellant argues the superior court erred by concluding he lacked the capacity to refuse medical treatment. We affirm. FACTS On March 19, 2013, appellant was civilly committed to the Department of State Hospitals-Coalinga as a Mentally Disordered Offender. (Pen. Code, § 2972.) On November 12, 2013, the People filed a petition seeking an order to compel involuntary treatment with psychotropic medication. At the hearing on the petition, Dr. Joyce Brown testified that appellant suffers from schizoaffective disorder with a history of treatment and incarceration for that condition, but denies both his condition and his prior history of treatment. According to Brown, appellant exhibits symptoms of mental thought disorder, mental confusion, hallucinations, delusions, and paranoia. Appellant also displays an inability to control his mood, as evidenced by a history of angry, unprovoked outbursts. Brown further testified appellant denies the need for any antipsychotic medications, and believes the hospital staff manufactures evidence against him in order to keep him medicated and institutionalized. Brown stated appellant’s condition improves with the administration of antipsychotic medications, and that prior to an increase in his medications, appellant had engaged in verbally abusive and physically violent behavior. Brown testified, however, that appellant did not believe those incidents had occurred, and instead believed they were hospital fabrications. Following Brown’s testimony, appellant testified that one violent incident Brown referred to had been provoked by racial hostility, while another had been fabricated by the hospital staff. Appellant also testified that he disliked taking his medication due to its sexual and sedative side effects.