Justices conduct hearing on ‘competency court’

A District Court program to determine whether criminal defendants are competent to stand trial came under fire Monday for allegedly failing to uphold their constitutional rights.

At issue is the District Court's "competency court," in which District Judge Jackie Glass holds hearings to determine mental competency.

Attorneys with the county public defender's office accused Glass of not allowing them to challenge her rulings. They also accused her of failing to provide full reports on their clients to them and of not allowing defense attorneys to contact doctors, among other charges.

Public defenders have asked the Nevada Supreme Court to examine these issues. On Monday, the Supreme Court held a public hearing in Las Vegas on the program and today will hear the appeal of Angelo Fergusen, which centers on competency issues.

"We saw that our clients' constitutional rights were being violated in a variety of ways," said Christy Craig, chief deputy public defender.

She painted a picture of a system in crisis, where defense attorneys don't know who the doctors are who evaluate their clients and are provided only short summaries of doctors' reports. She also said Glass doesn't allow defense attorneys to bring in doctors of their choosing to make a competency evaluation.

The public defender's office highlighted Kanohea Samuel Heaukulani's case. Authorities filed a criminal case against Heaukulani in March 2007 accusing him of open and gross lewdness. His attorneys had concerns about his mental status, and his case was sent to Glass in competency court.

On May 17, 2007, Glass told the attorneys that Heaukulani was competent, and the case was eventually sent to District Judge Donald Mosley for trial. Mosely reviewed Heaukulani's psychiatric report and ruled he should be sent to Lake's Crossing, the state's mental health facility for criminal suspects, according to court documents.

Glass later "demanded" that Mosley return the case to her, which he did, documents state. Defense attorneys asked for a competency evaluation but were denied because court "had already had the client evaluated according to the court's procedures," documents state.

During Monday's hearing, Glass defended the program to the Supreme Court justices. Before the competency court began, criminal defendants languished in jail for months waiting to get a mental health evaluation. She said they often were given medications at Lake's Crossing -- where criminal defendants are sent for treatment -- but were given a different type of medication once they returned to the county jail. Authorities were also desperate for bed space at Lake's Crossing.

The state was also sued in 2005 in federal court by a criminal defendant who wasn't given a psychiatric evaluation at Lake's Crossing and was stuck at the county jail, according to the lawsuit.

Glass said criminal defendants stayed in jail an average of 57 days in 2004 while waiting to be transferred to Lake's Crossing. In 2005, they waited an average of 77 days. That number declined dramatically after the competency court began operating. In 2007, the average wait to be transported to Lake's Crossing was 13 days. By 2008, it was seven, she said.

But Gary Peck, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said the courts shouldn't sacrifice constitutional rights for efficiency. He also was concerned that Glass appeared to be acting as both an administrator of the case and as a judge who hears the facts of the case.

"It creates the appearance of a conflict of interest and it creates a problem because she is playing dual roles," he said.

Contact reporter David Kihara at dkihara@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-1039.