From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Application of Cathey

California Court of Appeals, Third District
Dec 1, 1960
9 Cal. Rptr. 533 (Cal. Ct. App. 1960)

Opinion

Rehearing Denied Dec. 8, 1960.

Hearing Granted Jan. 25, 1961.

Opinion vacated 12 Cal.Rptr. 762.

James Jack Cathey in pro. per., for petitioner.

Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., by Doris H. Maier, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.


WARNE, Justice pro tem.

Petitioner was charged by an information filed by the District Attorney of Los Angeles County with one count of murder, one count of assault with intent to commit murder, and one count of robbery. On motion made pursuant to section 1368 of the Penal Code, petitioner was found to be presently insane and criminal proceedings were suspended. He was committed to the Atascadero State Hospital, where he was received on October 27, 1959. While there, he engaged in various antisocial acts, but on March 2, 1960 he was certified to the Los Angeles Superior Court as able to understand the nature of the charges against him and to cooperate rationally with his attorney in his own defense. An order was made that he be returned to the Los Angeles court, but prior to the date fixed for his return he attacked and killed one psychiatric technician and seriously injured four others. He was immediately released to the custody of the sheriff of San Luis Obispo County.

An information was then filed against him in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County, charging him with one count of murder and four counts of assault with intent to commit murder. After he entered pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity to the charges, a motion was made pursuant to section 1368 of the Penal Code to determine his sanity. A hearing was had thereon and petitioner was found to be presently insane. He was committed to the Department of Mental Hygiene of the State of California for placement in Atascadero State Hospital. The trial court further ordered that the authorities at the Atascadero State Hospital shall, at their option, be permitted to arrange for petitioner's confinement at any other state correctional facility that is available to them for this purpose. Thereafter, pursuant to the provisions of section 11256 of the Government Code, the Department of Mental Hygiene and the Deparment of Corrections entered into an interagency agreement whereby the Department of Corrections agreed to accept for temporary care, treatment, and confinement a limited number of adult male patients under commitment to the Department The petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus to secure his release from the California Medical Facility at Vacaville on the ground that his incarceration in a penal institution is illegal. It is his position that, since he was committed under section 1368 of the Penal Code as an insane or mentally ill person, his incarceration is limited to a state hospital for the insane or mentally ill. Thus, the question presented by the petition is the authority of the Department of Mental Hygiene to transfer a person committed to its care to the Department of Corrections.

Section 163 of the Welfare and Institutions Code provides in part that: 'The Department of Mental Hygiene, when it deems it necessary, may, under conditions prescribed by the director, transfer any inmate of a state institution under its jurisdiction to another such institution. * * *' in accordance with the provisions of section 6700 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. That section declares that: 'It shall be the policy of the department to make available to all persons committed to its jurisdiction all of the facilities under the control of the department. Whenever, in the opinion of the Director of Mental Hygiene, it appears that a person committed to the Department of Mental Hygiene for placement in a designated institution would be benefited by a transfer from that designated institution to another institution in the department, the director may cause the transfer of the patient or inmate from that institution to another institution under the jurisdiction of the department.' This section further provides in part that: '* * * before any inmate of a correctional school may be transferred to a state hospital for the insane, he shall first be returned to a court of competent jurisdiction, and, after a hearing, may be committed to a state hospital for the insane in accordance with law.'

Section 164 of the Welfare and Institutions Code provides that: 'The Director of Mental Hygiene may authorize the transfer of persons from any institution within the department to any institution authorized by the Federal Government to receive such person.' Under the provisions of these sections the power vested in the Department of Mental Hygiene to transfer an inmate is specifically limited. These sections do not authorize the transfer of an inmate to an institution under the control of another state agency, nor is there any power vested in the trial court to authorize such a transfer.

The respondent takes the position that under section 11256 of the Government Code the contract was authorized and under the contract and the section, the transfer was authorized and legal. We do not agree. Section 11256 reads as follows:

'Subject to approval of the Director of Finance, state agencies may furnish services, materials or equipment to, or perform fork for, other state agencies upon such terms and conditions and for such considerations as they may determine and, subject to such approval, may enter into agreements for such purpose. The state agency furnishing or performing said work, services, materials or equipment shall include in its charges therefor such direct and indirect costs to the State in furnishing or performing said work, services, materials or equipment as may be approved by the Director of Finance, and such state agency shall compute said charges in a manner approved by the Director of Finance. 'The Director of Finance, upon such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, may except from his approval, or grant blanket approval for, the performance of any work, the furnishing of any services, materials or equipment, the entering into of any agreements, the computation of any charges, or the inclusion of any costs provided for herein.'

We cannot interpret this section as authorizing the Department of Mental Hygiene to transfer an inmate committed to its care to another state agency. To so hold would be contrary to the specific limitations of section 163 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

A reading of the various code provisions found in the Welfare and Institutions Code and the Penal Code concerning transfers discloses the following:

Section 1755.5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code permits the Youth Authority to transfer persons in its custody to the California Medical Facility or the California Institution for Men; section 2684 of the Penal Code authorizes the Director of Corrections to transfer mentally ill or insane persons from a state prison to one of the hospitals under the jurisdiction of the Department of Mental Hygiene; section 6208 of the Penal Code permits transfers of persons to Conservation Centers; section 5080 of the Penal Code authorizes the transfer of prisoners from one state prison to another; section 2046.2 of the Penal Code authorizes the transfer of prisoners to a California medium security prison; and section 2048.2 of the Penal Code authorizes the transfer of prisoners to the California Correctional Institution at Tehachapi. These specific statutes indicate a legislative scheme to specifically provide for authority to transfer.

Since there is no authority to transfer an insane person to a prison, the transfer of the petitioner was improper. Accordingly, petitioner is illegally incarcerated in the California Medical Facility, which is under the control of the Department of Corrections. He is entitled to be released from the California Medical Facility, but not discharged. Since he is subject to a valid commitment to Atascadero State Hospital the petitioner should be returned to that institution.

The return to the order to show cause shall stand as the return to the writ. The writ is granted and the petitioner is discharged from the custody of the California Medical Facility at Vacaville and ordered returned to the custody of the Department of Mental Hygiene and thence returned to the Atascadero State Hospital.

SCHOTTKY, J., concurs.

VAN DYKE, Justice.

I dissent.

Section 11256 of the Government Code authorizes any agency of the state government to furnish services, materials and equipment, and to perform work for any other state agency. This is a sensible statute intended to increase the efficiency of the state government, through its agencies, in the performance of all governmental functions. It must often occur that an agency of government in the performance of the governmental functions allocated to it must do something in a particular case which can be better done by another agency than by itself. It is the clear and broad purpose of this statute to permit this to be done, and in order that it may be so done, the statute requires that the two agencies involved enter into an agreement with each other covering what is to be done by one for the other. The agreement must take into consideration the expense incurred by the performing agency and the adjustment between the agencies of the matter of cost of the particular service or work to be done, or of the particular materials or equipment to be furnished. It is apparent that the intent of the legislature was not that any agency should encroach upon another and not that any agency should avoid the performance of its own functions through transferring such performance to another, but that when a particular situation called The custody, care and treatment of the mentally ill is committed to the Department of Mental Hygiene, and generally those requiring such aid are, by various statutes, directed to be committed to that Department. But all state facilities for the custody, care and treatment of the mentally ill are not operated by the Department of Mental Hygiene. The state has established an institution under the direction of the Department of Corrections, known as the California Medical Facility, located at Vacaville. The primary purpose of the Medical Facility is declared by statute (Penal Code section 6102) to be the receiving, segregation, confinement, treatment and care of males under the custody of the Department of Corrections, or any agency thereof, who are mentally ill, mentally defective, epileptic, addicted to the use of narcotics, otherwise physically or mentally abnormal, including but not limited to psychopaths and sex offenders, or who are suffering from any chronic disease or condition. The state has implemented the establishment of the Medical Facility by constructing at Vacaville suitable and fully equipped buildings, structures and other facilities for the use of that institution. It appears in the return to the order to show cause heretofore issued that not only has the Medical Facility been so construed and equipped, but that it is further staffed by persons specially trained and qualified in every way for the care and treatment of the mentally ill.

Petitioner herein, having been found insane to the point that he could not be tried in the Los Angeles Superior Court upon charges pending against him (murder and armed robbery), was committed to the Department of Mental Hygiene and to the Atascadero State Hospital, operated by that department, for custody and for treatment of his mental condition to the end that he could be rehabilitated and cured to the point where he could be fairly tried for the crimes charged against him. While in the custody of that hospital, he killed one member of the staff and critically injured others in an attempt to kill them. He was charged in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County, in which the hospital is located, with these crimes, and was put in the custody of the sheriff to await trial. He was again, however, declared to be presently insane and, under the statute, was again committed to the Department of Mental Hygiene and to the Atascadero State Hospital. In is made to appear that neither the Atascadero State Hospital nor any other state hospital possessed security facilities adequate to receive and care for petitioner with safety to petitioner and to those upon whom devolved the duty of his custody, care and treatment. Accordingly, the Department turned to section 11256 of the Government Code and made an agreement with the Department of Corrections for the furnishing to the Department of Mental Hygiene of services, materials and equipment and for the doing of such work in the custody, care and treatment of petitioner and those similarly afflicted, as the Department of Mental Hygiene was unable, in his particular case and in similar cases, to afford. By that agreement his status as a mental patient of the Department of Mental Hygiene was not disturbed and in fact was expressly declared to continue; and he is as much under the supervision of the committing court while confined in the Medical Facility as he would be while confined in the Atascadero State Hospital.

There can be no doubt that petitioner has been shown to be a person with a high potential of danger to those who are required to keep and care for him and that his condition necessitates extraordinary custodial requirements. These are not to be found in any state hospital presently operated by the I think we have here a situation coming squarely within the provisions of Government Code section 11256, and I find nothing unlawful in petitioner's present and temporary detention in the Medical Facility at Vacaville. No one could doubt that the State of California could authorize exactly what has been done here for exactly the same reasons and to meet exactly the same conditions with respect to the custody, care and treatment of petitioner and those similarly afflicted. In my view the state has done so, and I would therefore discharge the order to show cause and deny the writ.


Summaries of

Application of Cathey

California Court of Appeals, Third District
Dec 1, 1960
9 Cal. Rptr. 533 (Cal. Ct. App. 1960)
Case details for

Application of Cathey

Case Details

Full title:Cathey

Court:California Court of Appeals, Third District

Date published: Dec 1, 1960

Citations

9 Cal. Rptr. 533 (Cal. Ct. App. 1960)

Citing Cases

In re Cathey

In the case now numbered Crim. 6813, an order to show cause was issued by the District Court of Appeal, Third…