Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 46B.113 – Determination of Restoration Without Agreement
Current as of: 2024 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
(a) The court shall hold a hearing on a request by the head of a facility or outpatient treatment provider to which a defendant has been committed as a result of a finding of incompetency to stand trial to determine whether the defendant has been restored to competency.
(b) The court may hold a hearing on a motion to determine whether the defendant has been restored to competency or on the court’s decision on its own motion to inquire into restoration of competency, and shall hold a hearing if a motion and any supporting material establish good reason to believe the defendant may have been restored to competency.
Terms Used In Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 46B.113
- Defendant: In a civil suit, the person complained against; in a criminal case, the person accused of the crime.
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- Trial: A hearing that takes place when the defendant pleads "not guilty" and witnesses are required to come to court to give evidence.
(c) If a court holds a hearing under this article, on the request of the counsel for either party or the motion of the court, a jury shall make the competency determination. If the competency determination will be made by the court rather than a jury, the court may conduct the hearing:
(1) at the facility; or
(2) by means of an electronic broadcast system as provided by Article 46B.013.
(d) If the head of a facility or outpatient treatment provider to which the defendant was committed as a result of a finding of incompetency to stand trial has provided an opinion that the defendant has regained competency, competency is presumed at a hearing under this subchapter and continuing incompetency must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.
(e) If the head of a facility or outpatient treatment provider has not provided an opinion described by Subsection (d), incompetency is presumed at a hearing under this subchapter and the defendant’s competency must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.