T.M.
T.M. v. Super. Ct.
Opinion
Opinion
Chou, J.
BACKGROUND
The Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office (District Attorney) filed a juvenile wardship petition against petitioner T.M. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602, subd. (a).) The petition alleged that T.M., who was 14 at the time, committed: (1) sodomy by use of force on a minor under 14 years of age (Pen. Code, § 286, subd. (c)(2)(B); counts 1, 5, 7, 9); (2) forcible lewd acts upon a child (id., § 288, subd. (b)(1); counts 2, 6, 10); (3) attempted sodomy by use of force on a minor under 14 years of age (id., §§ 286, subd. (c)(2)(B) & 664; counts 3, 4); and (4) criminal threats (id., § 422; count 8). Over seven months after the filing of the petition, T.M.’s counsel declared a doubt as to T.M.’s competency. Following the Contra Costa County juvenile competency protocol (Protocol), the juvenile court suspended the wardship proceeding and transferred T.M.’s competency determination “to the court designated to handle juvenile competency proceedings.” Under the Protocol, the designated court selects an expert evaluator who “possess[es] qualifications consistent with [Welfare and Institutions Code] [s]ection 709[, subdivision] (b)(2) and [California Rules of Court,] [r]ule