People v. Gambord CA5

California Court of Appeal Sep 15, 2016 No. F070669Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed an order authorizing the involuntary administration of psychotropic medication to a sexually violent predator, finding substantial evidence supported the trial court's determination that the defendant lacked the capacity to refuse treatment.

Issues

Whether there was substantial evidence to support the trial court's finding that the defendant was incompetent to refuse psychotropic medication.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“So I am finding that the defendant lacks the appropriate capacity to make the decisions. And I’m approving the forced medication order.”

“The evidence established he was not aware of his bipolar illness and his need for medication of that illness, and was not able to rationally participate in the treatment decision.”

Filed 9/15/16 P. v. Gambord 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F070669 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 14CRAD682209) v.

JEFFREY GAMBORD, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Jonathan B. Conklin, Judge. Robert Navarro, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Julie Weng-Gutierrez, Assistant Attorney General, Niromi W. Pfeiffer, and Karli Eisenberg, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J.

Appellant Jeffrey Gambord, a sexually violent predator, appeals from a December 1, 2014, order authorizing the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) to involuntarily administer psychotropic medications to treat his bipolar disorder. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY The Petition On September 4, 2014, DSH petitioned the superior court for an order compelling involuntary treatment of Gambord with psychotropic medication pursuant to In re Calhoun (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1315. The petition alleged that Gambord was admitted to Coalinga State Hospital (CSH) on September 19, 2006, pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 6604. The petition stated he was diagnosed with Bipolar I Disorder, Current Episode Manic, and was involuntarily administered psychotropic medication pursuant to an in-house panel determination conducted on April 10, 2014. The petition further alleged that Gambord had a history of noncompliance with taking psychotropic medication, continued to demonstrate a lack of insight into his mental illness and his need for psychotropic medication, was unable to reason and understand the gravity of his actions, and was incompetent to refuse medical treatment. Moreover, he presented a danger to others when not medicated with psychotropic medication, threatening staff and exposing himself to female staff. Finally, the petition alleged there were no less intrusive methods to render him non-dangerous than administration of psychotropic medication. The Hearing Dr. Risley Dr. Dawn Risley, a psychiatrist at CSH, testified that Gambord was her patient and she saw him multiple times per day. She diagnosed him with “Bipolar I Disorder, most recent episode manic with psychotic features.” He had an “[e]xpansive, elevated and irritable mood lasting greater than one week with pressured speech and a need to keep

People v. Gambord CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief