In re Terraza

BACKGROUND

This case began on April 13, 2021, when the Acting Warden of the California

Institute for Men petitioned the Superior Court for authorization to perform ECT on

inmate Rudy Paul Terraza. The warden’s petition relied on a statutory scheme enacted in

1974 that has never been addressed by an appellate court: Penal Code sections 2670 1 through 2680, which govern “organic therapy” in prisons. The statute defines organic

therapy as encompassing, among other things, “[s]hock therapy, including, but not

limited to, any convulsive therapy” as well as any “electronic stimulation of the brain.”

(§ 2670.5, subds. (c)(2), (c)(3).)

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 Penal Code section 2670, a declaration of policy, establishes that in California “all

persons, including all persons involuntarily confined, have a fundamental right against

enforced interference with their thought processes, states of mind, and patterns of

mentation, through the use of organic therapies.” The declaration states that organic

therapies shall not be performed on involuntarily confined persons who lack “the capacity

for informed consent,” unless the state establishes…