People v. Lopez CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 11, 2022F081020California5,219 words

Opinion

Opinion

Snauffer, J.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On November 19, 2018, the Kern County Superior Court filed an information charging Lopez with two counts of making criminal threats (§ 422). Count 1 was for victim J.L. and count 2 for victim J.M. It was alleged in both counts that Lopez had suffered a prior serious felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (c)–(j), § 1170.12, subds. (a)–(e)), and had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Lopez pleaded not guilty to the charges and denied all allegations on November 21, 2018. On December 19, 2018, defense counsel raised a doubt as to Lopez’s competency to stand trial under section 1368. The court suspended proceedings and appointed a licensed clinical psychologist, Dr. Michael Musacco, to examine Lopez. Dr. Musacco examined Lopez and found her to be malingering, but also offered the diagnoses of unspecified mood disorder, stimulant use disorder, and antisocial personality disorder. Dr. Musacco found Lopez competent to stand trial because of the malingering finding. At a review hearing, defense counsel objected to Dr. Musacco’s findings and moved for appointment of a second mental health professional to examine…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.