(Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 95953)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Bamattre-manoukian, Acting P.J.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Defendant George Louis Bachmeier appeals from an order extending his commitment under Penal Code section 1026.5*fn1 for two years. He contends that there is insufficient evidence to support the trial court's finding that he represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others, as required by section 1026.5, subdivision (b)(1). As we find that substantial evidence supports the trial court's order, we will affirm the order for extended commitment.
Defendant's Prior Commitments
On December 20, 1983, defendant stabbed his stepfather in the eye with a small paring knife. His mother also received injuries while attempting to stop the assault. Criminal proceedings were instituted, charging defendant with assault with a deadly weapon with personal infliction of great bodily injury. (§§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 12022.7). He was admitted to Atascadero State Hospital (Atascadero) on February 24, 1984, after being found incompetent to stand trial. On March 27, 1986, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGI) (see § 1026), and was thereafter readmitted to Atascadero. On October 11, 1990, defendant was placed under the supervision of the Santa Clara County Conditional Release Program (CONREP).
Defendant remained under the supervision of CONREP for the next 14 years with hospitalization at Napa State Hospital (Napa) various times for periods of two weeks to three months. On December 14, 2004, defendant was returned to Napa after an eight-month CONREP placement. He continued his assaultive and paranoid behavior at Napa. On April 10, 2007, defendant's treatment team determined that, because of a mental disease, defect, or disorder, defendant represented a substantial danger of physical harm to others, and recommended that his maximum term of commitment be extended pursuant to section 1026.5. The Acting Medical Director of Napa sent a letter to the District Attorney of Santa Clara County on June 8, 2007, requesting that a petition be filed for extension of defendant's commitment, which would expire on January 14, 2008.
The district attorney filed a petition for a two-year extension of defendant's commitment on July 26, 2007. A court trial was held on the petition on April 24, 2008. After hearing testimony by Toby Lamb, Ph.D., a staff psychologist at Napa, and a statement by defendant, the court found the petition true and extended defendant's commitment for two years. This court affirmed the extended commitment order in an unpublished decision. (People v. Bachmeier (May 12, 2009, H033016).)
The Current Extended Commitment Order
On May 28, 2009, defendant's treatment team determined that, because of a mental disease, defect, or disorder, defendant represented a substantial danger of physical harm to others, and recommended that defendant's maximum term of commitment be extended pursuant to section 1026.5. The Medical Director of Napa sent a letter to the District Attorney of Santa Clara County on July 2, 2009, requesting that a petition be filed for the extension of defendant's commitment, which would expire on January 14, 2010. The district attorney filed a petition for a two-year extension of defendant's commitment on July 10, 2009. A court trial on the petition was held on February 25, 2010.
Dr. Lamb testified as an expert in the diagnosis of mental disorders and the assessment of risk. He has been defendant's staff psychologist at Napa for three years, during which time he has given defendant ongoing treatment. Defendant's diagnosis is chronic schizophrenia, paranoid type. "[H]e has a tendency to misperceive the intentions of others, misperceive social interactions, and in the past this misperception has caused him to act aggressively towards others . . . . [H]e tends to see things different than other people do, he tends to react in a hostile manner." ...