People v. Hansan CA1/5

Filed 12/22/15 P. v. Hansan CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A145177 v. JOHN MICHAEL HANSAN, (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR-32259) Defendant and Appellant.

John Michael Hansan appeals from a judgment extending his state hospital commitment under Penal Code section 1026.5,1 which governs the procedures for extending the commitments of persons found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGI). He contends the evidence was insufficient to support the findings necessary for the extension. We affirm.

BACKGROUND In 2003, appellant was charged with battery on a peace officer and found to be NGI. (§§ 243, subd. (c)(2), 1026.) He was committed to Napa State Hospital, and that commitment was extended several times under section 1026.5, sometimes with appellant’s consent or stipulation. On December 2, 2014, the district attorney filed a petition for extension of the commitment (which was then due to expire on May 29, 2015) for two years. The case proceeded to a jury trial in April 2015, at which

1 Further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

Dr. Domingo Laguitan, a staff psychiatrist with the hospital, was the sole witness to testify. Dr. Laguitan had known appellant for nine months at the time of trial. Appellant was housed in one of the hospital’s most restrictive units, which was designed for patients whose symptoms impacted their day-to-day functioning. Appellant generally refused to see Dr. Laguitan, and they had last met approximately two months before the trial. Appellant suffers from schizophrenia, a chronic illness that requires constant treatment including medication. Though schizophrenia does not necessarily make people more dangerous, appellant’s symptoms include paranoia and delusions that can trigger anger and anxiety and make him more prone to aggression. Appellant’s schizophrenia was diagnosed in 1997, and in Dr. Laguitan’s opinion, his 2003 battery offense was caused by his mental illness. Dr. Laguitan believed appellant’s current mental state was not much different than it had been at the time of that offense. One of appellant’s recurring delusions was that his food and drinks were being poisoned. This translated into a concern about taking medications, and he only took medications because he was required to take them. He stopped taking his medications in February 2015 (about two months before the trial) and they had been administered involuntarily after a hearing at which it was determined he was incompetent to refuse them. Appellant had also stopped taking his medications in 2008, at which time he lost a lot of weight due to his concerns about being poisoned. He did not believe he was ill or needed medications. Dr. Laguitan testified that appellant had been involved in “several . . . incidents of pushing and verbal aggression towards staff” at the hospital. On January 11, 2013, he shoved a staff member. In March 2015, he said he was “going to kill” anyone who stole a package he had received. On April 14, 2015, he forcibly shoved a staff member on the back, saying, “[Y]ou’re in my way, better get out of my way, you fucking retard.” In the months leading up to trial, appellant had made “rude and sarcastic” remarks to staff, had