Insanity defense prompts more evaluations

EL CENTRO — Murder defendant Ioan Laurint is scheduled to undergo three more mental health evaluations as a result of his pleading not guilty by reason of insanity in his recently resumed criminal case.

Laurint appeared briefly in court on Wednesday for a pre-trial conference, where parties discussed the manner and amount in which the mental health professionals were to be compensated.

County Superior Court Judge Christopher Plourd also indicated that aside from two psychologists, the court would order a psychiatrist to evaluate Laurint as part of his insanity defense.

Following the conclusion on Oct. 11 of a civil case that determined Laurint was competent to stand trial, he subsequently entered a not guilty plea by reason of insanity during his arraignment on Oct. 18.

Previously, Plourd had chosen two psychologists from the three San Diego-based experts that counsel had submitted for consideration.

Laurint’s criminal trial had been scheduled to get underway on Nov. 27, but that date was vacated in order to allow additional time for the mental health evaluations and provide counsel time to review material in preparation for the trial.

The insanity defense trial will consist of two phases, the first of which will allow a jury to determine whether Laurint is guilty or not guilty of first-degree murder.

He is alleged to have fatally stabbed El Centro attorney Ann Marie Zimmermann to death on Feb. 17, 2017, at a motel in El Centro.

Should he be found guilty of murder, a second trial would then be held to determine whether Laurint was insane, as defined by the law, at the time the incident occurred, said defense attorney Donald Levine.

The so-called “sanity phase” of the trial is when the recently retained mental health experts would testify.

State law prevents the same mental health experts who had previously examined Laurint as part of his civil mental competency trial from being used as expert witnesses in his resumed criminal trial, court records stated.

Jurors in the competency trial had deliberated for about three hours before reaching a verdict on Oct. 11 that declared Laurint was competent to stand trial.

Although three of the four mental health professionals who examined Laurint as part of that trial had determined he was not competent to stand trial, jurors sided with the one who concluded Laurint was faking his symptoms of cognitive and psychological impairment.

Incompetency is centered on whether a defendant is able to understand the court proceedings and his status, as well as participate in his defense and differs from a so-called insanity defense.

An insanity defense asserts that even though the defendant may have committed the crime, that person’s mental condition prevented him from understanding the nature of the act or distinguishing between right and wrong.

During the insanity phase of the trial, the burden of proof falls on the defense.

Laurint currently remains in custody on a $1 million bail. He is scheduled to return to court on Dec. 19 for a pre-trial hearing.