248 Cal. App. 4th 110
Cal. Ct. App.2016Background
- Marc Anthony Endsley was found not guilty by reason of insanity for a 1995 murder and committed to Patton State Hospital under Penal Code §1026.
- Endsley previously obtained conditional release (CONREP) in 2012, was revoked in 2013, and recommitted to Patton.
- Progress reports from Patton (2014–2015) indicated improvement; Patton evaluators recommended CONREP placement and scheduled an interview.
- In May 2015 Endsley filed a pro per petition under Penal Code §1026.2 seeking conditional release, appointment of counsel, and an independent psychiatric evaluation.
- The trial court summarily denied the petition without stating reasons; Endsley appealed arguing he was entitled to a hearing under §1026.2.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a petitioner is entitled to a hearing on a §1026.2 petition for conditional release | People: a hearing is required generally but the petition here was facially deficient because it lacked the medical director’s written recommendation, so the court could deny it | Endsley: §1026.2(l) requires the court — not the defendant — to obtain the medical director’s written recommendation before taking action; petitioner is entitled to a hearing | The court held Endsley is entitled to a hearing and that §1026.2(l) requires the court to obtain the medical director’s written recommendation in advance of the hearing; reversed and remanded for hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Tilbury, 54 Cal.3d 56 (Cal. 1991) (describes two-step §1026.2 release process and procedural protections at outpatient hearing)
- People v. Soiu, 106 Cal.App.4th 1191 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) (trial court must hold outpatient hearing on §1026.2 petition; defendant entitled to procedural safeguards)
- In re Reyes, 161 Cal.App.3d 655 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984) (outpatient hearing requires right to counsel and opportunity to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses)