By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
Woodland, CA – It was a short hearing where Judge McAdam read the competency report by a medical examiner who concluded Carlos Dominguez, accused of stabbing two people in Davis in late April, was not competent to stand trial at this moment.
The media coverage largely focused on what happened next, when Dominguez stated that he “would like apologize” and then acknowledged, “I’m guilty.”
This is probably he has attempted to say from the start. But with criminal proceedings suspended, the judge noted, that while he has a right to remain silent, nothing that he said at this time, can be used against him.
It is pretty clear that Dominguez suffered something in the past year to cause him to go on his current path. A medical expert has now concluded that he is not competent to stand trial. Watching him both when he was arrested and in the previous hearing, it is easy to see there is a clear problem.
But for reasons that really doesn’t make a lot of sense – the DA’s office is contesting his competency.
Even more absurd is the idea that it should be a jury trial.
Public Defender Dan Hutchinson objected, “the defense is not requesting a jury trial.”
He added that “it is extremely unusual to request jury trials in 1368 proceedings,” referring to section 1368 of the California Penal Code, which discusses protocol regarding the accused’s competency.
Hutchinson continued, saying “in the 17 years I’ve been in this county, I can only recall one (1368 case) going to trial.” He then requested a court trial in lieu of the jury trial, adding, “until the issue of competency is resolved, (Dominguez)] can’t even get on a waiting list for the state hospital.”
While it doesn’t make a lot of sense to contest the competency? After all, is there actual harm in allowing him the time to get well before putting him through a prosecution?
But if you are going to contest the competency – why demand a jury trial?
Unfortunately, Judge McAdam noted that according to the law, the prosecutor has the right to a jury trial.
So now we are going to have a group of non-doctors weighing medical and psychiatric evidence from potentially competing experts to determine whether Dominguez is competent to stand trial?
This entire episode illustrates the absurdity of the system.
This is a tragic case, but it’s also clear that we are dealing with an individual who is more in need of compassion than punishment. Pushing the competency to a jury trial in July, really makes no logical sense and will not bring comfort for the families of those who are still in mourning.
“Unfortunately, Judge McAdam noted that according to the law, the prosecutor has the right to a jury trial.”
The editorial comment, “Unfortunately,” should not be part of Judge McAdam’s notation of the guiding statute requested by the prosecution. The phrasing implies that the judge personally disagrees with the current law, something that a magistrate would rarely say in open court.