Court Observation Paper
Date(s) of Court Observation: October 6, 2016
Court: 89th District Court – Judge Charles Barnard
Case (Parties/Attorneys): The State of Texas vs. Courtney Nicole Lee State representative Starla Jones and defense attorney Rebecca Ruddy Motion to find bond insufficient due to incompetence
Observations/Impressions:
Courtney Lee, a 20-year-old woman, the defendant in this case, was charged with first degree felony for two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a 13-year-old boy , a minor, she was dating. The initial bond was set at $5000 for each count, under the compulsory condition that she not be allowed around any minors. The case was taken back to court because the defendant dishonored the mandate of her release by being …show more content…
The rebuttal from the state’s attorney was that Lee appeared competent at the bond hearing, therefore, there was no reason to see the defendant as incompetent. The defense sustained to insinuate incompetence as the reason for Lee’s violations. Then continued to say that it is up to a specialist in mental health to determine incompetence. The state’s attorney saw it fit to ask for an informal inquiry rather than a competency evaluation. The motion was granted by the judge and both attorneys agreed to the questions that should be asked. In a rather tense moment, both attorneys approached the bench in order to discuss about questions to be answered by the defendant. The defendant was asked a series of questions, and ones that stood out were pertaining to her mental health as she had a history of schizophrenic behavior. Other questions asked were to determine what she does on a daily basis and well as her understanding of her rights as a citizen. After the question, the judge ruled for a competency evaluation by a professional to be done the following day.
Court: 89th District Court – Judge Charles Barnard
Case (Parties/Attorneys): The State of Texas vs. Courtney Nicole Lee State representative Starla Jones and defense attorney Rebecca Ruddy Motion to find bond insufficient due to incompetence
Observations/Impressions:
Courtney Lee, a 20-year-old woman, the defendant in this case, was charged with first degree felony for two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a 13-year-old boy , a minor, she was dating. The initial bond was set at $5000 for each count, under the compulsory condition that she not be allowed around any minors. The case was taken back to court because the defendant dishonored the mandate of her release by being …show more content…
The rebuttal from the state’s attorney was that Lee appeared competent at the bond hearing, therefore, there was no reason to see the defendant as incompetent. The defense sustained to insinuate incompetence as the reason for Lee’s violations. Then continued to say that it is up to a specialist in mental health to determine incompetence. The state’s attorney saw it fit to ask for an informal inquiry rather than a competency evaluation. The motion was granted by the judge and both attorneys agreed to the questions that should be asked. In a rather tense moment, both attorneys approached the bench in order to discuss about questions to be answered by the defendant. The defendant was asked a series of questions, and ones that stood out were pertaining to her mental health as she had a history of schizophrenic behavior. Other questions asked were to determine what she does on a daily basis and well as her understanding of her rights as a citizen. After the question, the judge ruled for a competency evaluation by a professional to be done the following day.