People v. Casciaro CA3

Filed 2/27/24 P. v. Casciaro CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C098534

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. LODCRFE20220010249) v.

JIOVANNI BENJAMIN CASCIARO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jiovanni Benjamin Casciaro appeals from an order committing him to the Department of State Hospitals for competency restoration pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1370.2 His appointed counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any

1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 The commitment order is appealable. (People v. Fields (1965) 62 Cal.2d 538, 540- 541; People v. Christiana (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1045-1046.)

1

arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm. I. BACKGROUND In October 2022, defendant was charged with carjacking (§ 215, subd. (a)—count 1), unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)—count 2) with a prior vehicle theft conviction (§ 666.5, subd. (a)), driving under the influence of drugs (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (f)—count 3) with a conviction for the same offense within the prior 10 years (Veh. Code, § 23540). Defendant pled not guilty and denied the enhancement allegations. In November 2022, defendant’s appointed counsel declared a doubt as to his competency pursuant to section 1368. The trial court suspended criminal proceedings and appointed an expert forensic psychologist, Dr. Marine Jakubowski, to examine defendant under sections 1368 and 1369. On December 16, 2022, Dr. Jakubowski attempted to meet with defendant, but he refused. According to her report, Correctional Health Facility documentation showed that defendant generally refused contact with mental health staff and denied having a history of mental health symptoms or treatment. At that time, defendant did not have a mental health diagnosis nor was there documentation of a psychotropic medication prescription. Citing time constraints and defendant’s history of refusing appointments and mental health services, Dr. Jakubowski informed the court that she would not attempt to interview defendant before the next court date and that she would not be submitting a competency report. At a hearing on December 20, 2022, the trial court ordered a medication evaluation and reordered Dr. Jakubowski to attempt to evaluate defendant. Defendant subsequently refused to attend the rescheduled evaluation on December 30, 2022. Based on a review of Correctional Health Facility documentation, Dr. Jakubowski informed the