P. v. Carr
Filed 6/12/06 P. v. Carr CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WILLIAM RANDALL CARR, Defendant and Appellant. |
F047190
(Super. Ct. No. F02670638-6)
OPINION |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. R. L. Putnam, Judge.
Steven Schorr, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, Charles A. French and Robert C. Nash, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
This is an appeal from final judgment imposed after a jury found defendant William Randall Carr guilty of first degree murder. (Pen. Code, § 187; all further section references are to this code.) The only issues raised on appeal deal with defendant's mental competence to stand trial. We affirm the judgment.
Facts and Procedural History
Defendant, a resident of a board and care facility in Fresno, killed the resident manager of the facility with an ax on August 31, 2001, after defendant was served an eviction notice. Defendant was arrested at the scene and held in jail pending trial.
Over the next two and a half years, pretrial proceedings occurred. These included a preliminary hearing and various discovery motions. Discovery motions included a prosecution request for a copy of a psychological report on defendant commissioned by the defense. At the hearing on that motion, the prosecutor stated that defendant was taking antipsychotic medication at the time of the offense and the prosecution needed to know whether defendant's â€
