(a) Application
The requirements of (b) of this rule apply only to a formal competency evaluation ordered by the court under section 1369(a). They do not apply to a brief preliminary evaluation of the defendant’s competency if:
(1) The parties stipulate to a brief preliminary evaluation; and
(2) The court orders the evaluation in accordance with a local rule of court that specifies the content of the evaluation and the procedure for its preparation and submission to the court.
(b) Examination of defendant
A court-appointed expert or experts must examine the defendant, review the records provided, and, in a report filed with the court and made available to counsel for the defendant and the prosecution, opine as to whether the defendant is currently competent to stand trial. The expert’s report must include the following:
(1) A brief statement of the examiner’s training and previous experience as it relates to examining the competence of a criminal defendant to stand trial and preparing a resulting report;
(2) A summary of the examination conducted by the examiner on the defendant, including statements made by the defendant during that examination, and a list of the records, digital media, and other information reviewed and considered by the examiner;
(3) A detailed analysis of the competence of the defendant to stand trial using California’s current legal standard, including the defendant’s ability or inability to understand the nature of the criminal proceedings or assist counsel in the conduct of a defense in a rational manner as a result of a mental health disorder;
(4) An analysis of all current diagnoses under the most recent version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders applicable to the defendant, based on the available records and evaluation;
(5) A summary of any assessment—which may include test results—into whether the defendant is malingering or feigning symptoms;
(6) In a felony proceeding, an opinion as to whether:
(A) There is a substantial likelihood that the defendant will attain competency in the foreseeable future, with consideration as to the possible benefits of treatment with antipsychotic medication, if within the scope of the expert’s licensure;
(B) Treatment with antipsychotic or other medication is necessary to restore the defendant to competency; and
(C) The defendant has capacity to make decisions regarding antipsychotic medication;
(7) An opinion as to whether the defendant is eligible for mental health diversion under section 1001.36, and a statement as to whether symptoms of the mental health disorder or disorders that motivated the defendant’s behavior would respond to mental health treatment. This opinion must be provided in a misdemeanor case or upon request by the defense in a felony case;
(8) An opinion as to whether cause exists to suspect that the defendant may have a developmental disability, with an explanation; and
(9) An opinion based on present clinical impressions and available historical data as to whether the defendant, regardless of custody status, appears to be gravely disabled, as defined in Welfare and Institutions Code section 5008(h)(1)(A).
Rule 4.131 adopted effective January 1, 2026.
Advisory Committee Comment
Once mental competency proceedings under Penal Code section 1367 et seq. have been initiated, the court is to appoint at least one expert to examine the defendant. Under no circumstances is the court obligated to appoint more than two experts. (Pen. Code, § 1369(a).) The costs of the experts appointed are to be paid for by the court, as the expert examinations and reports are for the benefit or use of the court in determining whether the defendant is mentally incompetent. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 10.810, function 10.)