 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Jones11/15/2005
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Defendant Debra Shelton Jones appeals from the judgment revoking her probation. Her sole argument on appeal is that the trial court erred in finding her mentally competent to proceed with the probation violation hearing. Because the record contains evidence supporting the trial court's determination that defendant was competent, we affirm.
Facts
On 2 February 2000, defendant was cited for driving with a revoked licence, driving without insurance, and driving while impaired. She was initially tried in district court and, on 3 October 2001, the court entered judgment convicting defendant of driving while her license was revoked, suspended the 45-daysentence, and placed defendant on 36-months probation. The next day, the district court entered judgment convicting defendant of driving while impaired, suspended the two-year sentence, and placed defendant on 36-months probation, with defendant ordered to serve an active sentence of 30 days.
Defendant's probation officer subsequently filed a violation report in each case alleging that defendant failed to: (1) report to her probation officer; (2) comply with monetary requirements; (3) provide proof of employment; and (4) provide proof of substance abuse assessment or treatment. On 7 November 2003, the district court entered judgments in both cases, revoking defendant's probation. Defendant appealed to the superior court for a trial de novo.
Prior to the probation violation hearing, defendant's attorney informed the court that defendant displayed a limited understanding that the revocation of her probation would restrain her liberty and requested an order for an evaluation of defendant. The trial court entered an "Order Appointing Local Certified Forensic Examiner" to determine if defendant had the mental capacity to proceed with the probation violation hearing.
Staff Psychologist Barbara J. Bailey of the Blue Ridge Center examined defendant at the detention facility and submitted her report to the trial court. In her report, Bailey concluded that "Ms. Jones will have difficulty participating in her defense, due to her mental condition and impaired memory" and recommended that defendant "be assessed further for medical and/or neurologicalproblems."
On 18 December 2003, the trial court held a competency hearing. After hearing testimony from Bailey and defendant's probation officer, the trial court determined defendant was competent to proceed. Thereafter, defendant waived reading of the violation report and admitted the allegations contained therein. The trial court found defendant to be in violation of her probation and activated her sentences. Defendant appeals.
Discussion
Defendant contends there was insufficient evidence from which the court could conclude she was competent to proceed. The test to determine a defendant's mental capacity to proceed to trial is found in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1001(a) (2003), which states:
No person may be tried, convicted, sentenced, or punished for a crime when by reason of mental illness or defect [the person] is unable to understand the nature and object of the proceedings . . ., to comprehend situation in reference to the proceedings, or to assist in his [or her] defense in a rational or reasonable manner.
A defendant may raise the issue of competency by motion under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1002(a) (2003). The defendant bear
Page 1 2 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|