CAUSE NO. «CAUSENO»
THE STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE «COURTNO» DISTRICT COURT
VS. § OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
«DEFENDANT» § «MONTH» TERM, A. D., «YEAR»
Members of the Jury:
The defendant, «DEFENDANT1», stands charged with a felony criminal offense. The defendant has filed a written motion in this cause asserting that the defendant is not presently competent to stand trial.
Our law provides that no person who becomes incompetent to stand trial after the alleged commission of an offense shall be tried for the same while in such condition.
Every person is presumed to be competent until the contrary is shown by a preponderance of the evidence.
To establish incompetency to stand trial at the present time it must be established by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant does not have:
(1) sufficient present ability to consult with her lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding; or
(2) a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against her.
In this case the burden of proof is by a preponderance of the evidence, and that burden rests on the defendant. By the term "preponderance of the evidence" is meant the greater weight of the credible evidence.
On the issue of incompetency to stand trial you are instructed that the law requires the jury to state in its verdict whether the defendant is incompetent to stand trial and if the jury finds the defendant incompetent to stand trial, then the jury shall state in its verdict whether there is no substantial probability that the defendant will attain the competency to stand trial within the foreseeable future.
Now, bearing in mind the foregoing instructions and definitions, if you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is presently incompetent to stand trial, you will so state, but if you do not so believe you will find the defendant competent to stand trial.
In the event that you have found that the defendant is presently incompetent to stand trial, you will state in your verdict whether there is no substantial probability that the defendant will attain the competency to stand trial within the foreseeable future.
The fact that the defendant is under indictment is no evidence of the defendant's competency to stand trial, and you should not consider such fact as evidence. Neither should you in your deliberations consider nor discuss the guilt or innocence of the defendant with respect to the offense charged against the defendant. You will confine your consideration and deliberations solely to the issues submitted to you.
You are the exclusive judges of the facts proved, of the credibility of the witnesses, and of the weight to be given to the testimony, but you must receive the law from the Court as herein given you and be governed thereby.
After you retire to your jury room you will select one of your members as your Foreman who will preside at your deliberations and vote with you in arriving at a unanimous verdict. You may use the forms attached hereto by having your Foreman sign his or her name to the particular form that conforms to your verdict.
«JUDGE», Judge
«COURTNO1» District Court
Harris County, TEXAS
SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 1
Do you find from the evidence that the defendant, «DEFENDANT1», is presently mentally competent to stand trial at this time.
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
Foreman
SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 2
Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant, «DEFENDANT1», is presently mentally incompetent to stand trial at this time?
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
Foreman
SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 3
Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that there is a substantial probability that the defendant, «DEFENDANT1», will become competent to stand trial within the foreseeable future.
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
Foreman
CERTIFICATE
We, the Jury, have answered the above and foregoing Special Issues as herein indicated, and herewith return the same into court as our verdict.
Date Foreman
If you have answered Special Issue No. 1 "We do", then return your verdict at this time.
If you have answered Special Issue No. 2 "We do" and Special Issue No. 3 "We do not", the Court now gives you certain definitions and instructions by which you will be governed in arriving at your answers to Special Issues No. 4 and 5 submitted to you.
The term "Mentally Ill Person" means a person who is mentally ill. The term Mental Illness means an illness, disease, or condition which either: (A) substantially impairs the person's thought, perception of reality, emotional process, or judgment; or (B) grossly impairs behavior as manifested by recent disturbed behavior.
The term "Mental Hospital" means a hospital operated for the primary purpose of providing in-patient care and treatment for the mentally ill. A hospital operated by an agency of the government and equipped to provide in-patient care and treatment for the mentally ill.
You are instructed that under our law a person who is mentally ill must meet certain criteria before she can be subjected to court-ordered mental health services. Those are: (1) that she is likely to cause serious harm to herself, (2) that she is likely to cause serious harm to others, or (3) that she will, if not treated, continue to suffer severe and abnormal mental, emotional, or physical distress and will continue to experience deterioration of her ability to function independently and is unable to make a rational and informed decision as to whether or not to submit to treatment.
The Burden of Proof is upon the Defendant to prove each of the below listed Special Issues by Clear and Convincing Evidence.
By the term "Clear and Convincing Evidence" is meant proof, not beyond a reasonable doubt, but proof greater than a preponderance of the credible evidence. If you find that the defendant has proved a Special Issue by Clear and Convincing Evidence, you will answer that Special Issue "We do"; otherwise you will answer that Special Issue "We do not".
You are charged that your verdict must be unanimous. You will not, therefore, enter into an agreement to be bound by a majority, or any vote other than a unanimous vote of all jurors.
Now, bearing in mind the foregoing definitions and instructions, you will answer the following Special Issues.
SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 4
Do you find by Clear and Convincing Evidence that «DEFENDANT1» is a mentally ill person?
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 5
If you have found the answer to Special Issue No. 4 to be "We do", do you find by Clear and Convincing Evidence that «DEFENDANT1» meets the criteria for Court-ordered mental health services in that she:
(a) is likely to cause serious harm to herself
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
(b) is likely to cause serious harm to others
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
(c) will, if not treated, continue to suffer severe and abnormal mental, emotional, or physical distress and will continue to experience deterioration of her ability to function independently and is unable to make a rational and informed decision as to whether or not to submit to treatment.
Answer "We do" or "We do not":
ANSWER:
When all issues have been answered, your Foreman will sign the certificate following your answers and return the same into Court as your verdict.
«JUDGE», Judge
«COURTNO1» District Court
Harris County, TEXAS
CERTIFICATE
We, the Jury, have answered the above and foregoing Special Issues as herein indicated, and herewith return the same into court as our verdict.
Date Foreman
9