People v. Barker CA5

Filed 3/1/16 P. v. Barker 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F069815 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. MCR032919, v. MMH00236)

DAVID ANTHONY BARKER, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Madera County. Mitchell C. Rigby, Judge.

Linda J. Zachritz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- INTRODUCTION Appellant David Anthony Barker appeals the trial court’s order dated July 22, 2014, revoking his conditional release status and ordering him returned to Patton State

*Before Kane, Acting P.J., Franson, J. and Peña, J.

Hospital (Patton). Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 2, 2008, Barker was charged in counts 1 and 2 with assaulting John Steele with a deadly weapon, violations of Penal Code1 section 245, subdivision (a)(1). He also was charged in counts 3 and 4, respectively, with resisting a peace officer by force, a violation of section 243, subdivision (c)(2), and resisting a peace officer, a violation of section 148, subdivision (a)(1). In September 2008, Drs. Robert Taylor and Paula Willis evaluated Barker to determine his competency to stand trial. Both concluded Barker was competent to stand trial. By agreement of the parties, Barker entered a not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity plea to counts 1 and 2 on November 4, 2008, and submitted on the police reports. The trial court found Barker guilty of both counts. The trial court also appointed two doctors to evaluate Barker’s sanity at the time the offenses were committed and scheduled a court trial on the sanity phase for December 12, 2008. Drs. Taylor and Michael Zimmerman evaluated Barker to determine his sanity at the time of the commission of the offenses. Both Zimmerman and Taylor concluded Barker was unable to distinguish right from wrong at the time he committed the offenses. At the sanity hearing, both parties submitted the issue on the doctors’ reports, and the trial court found Barker “was not capable of knowing or understanding the nature and quality of his actions and distinguishing right from wrong at the time of commission of the offense.” The trial court referred the matter to the conditional release program (CRP) for placement. The CRP filed its report recommending placement at Napa State Hospital and concluding Barker would not benefit from outpatient treatment at that time. At the