16-8.5-113. Restoration to competency.

Statute text

(1) The court may order a restoration hearing at any time on its own motion, on motion of the prosecuting attorney, or on motion of the defendant; except that the court shall order a restoration hearing when required pursuant to section 16-8.5-111 (4)(a) or (4)(b).

(2) Within fourteen days after receipt of a report from the department or other court-approved competency evaluator certifying that the defendant is competent to proceed, either party may request a hearing or a second evaluation. The court shall determine whether to allow the second evaluation or proceed to a hearing on competency. If the second evaluation is requested by the court or by an indigent defendant, the evaluation must be paid for by the court.

(3) If a second evaluation is allowed, any pending requests for a hearing must be continued until receipt of the second evaluation report. The report of the expert conducting the second evaluation report must be completed and filed with the court within thirty-five days after the court order allowing the second evaluation, unless the time period is extended by the court after a finding of good cause. The court shall provide the second evaluation to the parties and the department.

(4) If neither party requests a hearing or second evaluation within the time frame set forth in subsection (2) of this section, the court shall enter a final determination, based on the information then available to the court, whether the defendant is or is not competent to proceed.

(5) If a party makes a timely request for a hearing, the hearing must be held within thirty-five days after the request for a hearing or, if applicable, within thirty-five days after the filing of the second evaluation report, unless the time is extended by the court after a finding of good cause.

(6) At the hearing, the party asserting that the defendant is competent has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence and the burden of submitting evidence. At the hearing, the court shall determine whether the defendant is restored to competency.

History

Source: L. 2008: Entire article added, p. 1846, 2, effective July 1. L. 2012: (2), (3), and (5) amended, (SB 12-175), ch. 208, p. 852, 81, effective July 1. L. 2019: (2) and (3) amended, (SB 19-223), ch. 227, p. 2283, 6, effective July 1. L. 2024: (1), (2), (5), and (6) amended, (HB 24-1034), ch. 372, p. 2515, 11, effective June 4. L. 2025: (2) and (3) amended, (SB 25-041), ch. 357, p. 1926, 7, effective August 6.

Annotations

 

ANNOTATION

Annotations

Based on application of standards related to the involuntary administration of medication for restoration of competency established by supreme court in Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003), medication may be administered to defendant to restore competency for trial. People in Interest of Hardesty, 2014 COA 138, 410 P.3d 553.