Incarcerated person's competence.
Summary
Existing law authorizes the warden of a state prison to whom an incarcerated person is delivered for execution to suspend the execution of a judgment of death in specified circumstances. Under existing law, if the court sets a date for execution, the warden is required to report that to the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, who is required to appoint 3 "alienists" (psychiatrists) from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation staff, at least 20 days prior to the date appointed for execution, to examine the defendant and investigate the defendant's sanity. This bill would require the secretary to select and appoint 3 psychiatrists or licensed psychologists to examine the incarcerated person and investigate and report whether the incarcerated person is competent to be executed. The bill would require that a copy of the report be provided to the incarcerated person, the Attorney General, the district attorney of the county in which the incarcerated person was sentenced, and to the Governor. Existing law requires the warden to notify the district attorney of the county in which the prison is situated if there is good reason to believe that an incarcerated person, under judgment of death, has become incompetent to be executed. Existing law requires the district attorney to immediately file a petition in the superior court of the county stating the conviction and judgment, the fact that the incarcerated person is believed to be incompetent to be executed, and inquiring into the incarcerated person's competence. Existing law also requires the court to summon and impanel a jury of 12 persons to inquire into the incarcerated person's sanity. This bill would require the warden to notify the district attorney of the county in which the incarcerated person was sentenced, the Attorney General, and the incarcerated person's counsel, if there is good reason to believe that an incarcerated person has become incompetent to be executed. If the warden issues that notice, the bill would require the Attorney General to file a petition, identifying that there is reason to believe that the incarcerated person is incompetent to be executed, with the court if the incarcerated person's counsel fails to file the petition or the incarcerated person does not have counsel. The bill would also remove the right to a jury trial on the subject of incompetence for execution. Existing law requires the judge to hold a hearing if the superintendent of the medical facility certifies to the judge that the incarcerated person has recovered their sanity, and if at the hearing it is determined that the incarcerated person has in fact recovered their sanity, existing law requires the judge to certify that to the Governor, who is required to then issue to the warden a warrant appointing a day for the execution of the judgment. Existing law requires the court to appoint counsel to represent the incarcerated person at the hearing if the defendant appears without counsel. Existing law also requires the district attorney to attend the hearing. This bill would require the court to hold a hearing if there is reason to believe the incarcerated person is presently incompetent to be executed, as specified, or if there is reason to believe the incarcerated person is permanently incompetent to be executed, as specified. The bill would require the court to vacate the sentence or sentences of death if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the incarcerated person is permanently incompetent to be executed, and would require the court to resentence the incarcerated person to life without the possibility of parole. The bill would not require the district attorney to attend the hearing.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2022
Committee Review
Aug 2022
Assembly Passage
May 2022
Senate Passage
Aug 2022
Signed into Law
Sep 2022
Introduced Feb 18, 2022
Signed Sep 29, 2022
Floor votes · Senate Aug 23, 2022 · Assembly May 25, 2022
How they voted
28–9
Passed
Total votes 37
Aug 23, 2022
D
Democratic29
96% Yea
R
Republican8
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
25
Key actions
10
Committee
9
Amendments
6
Sep 29, 2022
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 24, 2022
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 56. Noes 17.).
lower
Aug 23, 2022
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 25 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 23, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 30. Noes 10. Page 5012.).
upper
Aug 8, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
upper
Jul 27, 2022
Upper · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Jun 22, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0.) (June 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 8, 2022
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
Jun 1, 2022
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
May 25, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 56. Noes 18. Page 4913.)
lower
May 11, 2022
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 4.) (May 11).
lower
Apr 18, 2022
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 7, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 6, 2022
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (April 5).
lower
Apr 4, 2022
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Mar 31, 2022
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 10, 2022
Committee
Referred to Com. on PUB. S.
lower
Feb 19, 2022
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.
lower
Feb 18, 2022
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Mark Stone
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2657
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2657. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline