Hello again and thank you for that extensive information. It looks like from what you have provided this is what happened and is happening, in July 2010 the defendant was indicted by the grand jury and that means, officially charged with various crimes, all of which are not listed on the above document because as you can see, some have been sealed (see notation for 7/14/2010) BUT it states that bail was set at that time, meaning your friend appears to have been released on bond in September of 2010 and the underlying bench warrant was expunged. THen, it is hard to make out but something happened in November where the court was informed the defendant's attorney would not be available until after January 2011. I assume and it appears that the bail bond revoked the bond at some point here and bail was reinstated at $7,500 (I am trying to read a code, so bear with me). There was a conference January 18, 2011 where all the traditional legal notices were served and preserved for your friend by his lawyer. March 4, 2011 was the first time his commitment was brought into the case as a matter of record in that the record reflects that the judge ordered any commitment or decisions to be stayed (held off) until the ruling on his fitness. I see that on June 20, 2012 he was found FIT to proceed. His next court date is August 24, 2012. I have a feeling that if he is saying he has not been to court it is not that his case has not been proceeding it is a situation where his attorney has been waiving his appearance, meaning, the attorney and the court have proceeded without him because it was probably a lot easier for them to do a lot of those procedural things without transporting him. Now, if anything is to happen, like a plea or a trial, of course he has to be there. And, if he is not aware these things have been going on for two years, he needs to talk to his criminal defense lawyer. He should not listen to other people in the hospital or jail or doctors for legal advice. They already found him fit, according to your document, meaning he has enough capacity to understand who everyone is, who is his lawyer what they do, what is going on and able enough to assist in his defense. It is pretty hard to be found unfit, but as I stated, you only remain in limbo until you are found fit again, which occurs often when the person is stabilized to some degree. Whether or not he goes to court, he needs to demand to speak to his lawyer, call him/her and find out what's going on. It is unclear from the above document if the underlying charge is Larceny or criminal destruction of property, because the codes don't match, but if he is charged with burglary, he must also be charged with committing a felony within the dwelling he supposedly burgarlized. Larceny in the second degree is a felony with a significant jail possibility, but the penal code they list doesn't match Larceny, which is what they name in the above document. More info to come....
The New MExico Statute about incompetent defendants shows that your friend's doctor or whoever gave him that information is incorrect as the law clearly states; (I BOLDED AND UNDERLINED RELEVANT pORTIONS)
If at any time the district court determines that there is not a substantial probability that the defendant will become competent to proceed in a criminal case within a reasonable period of time not to exceed nine months from the date of the original finding of incompetency, the district court may:
A. hear the matter pursuant to Section 31-9-1.5 NMSA 1978 within three months if the defendant is charged with a felony that involves the infliction of great bodily harm on another person; a felony that involves the use of a firearm; aggravated arson, as provided in Section 30-17-6 NMSA 1978; criminal sexual penetration, as provided in Section 30-9-11 NMSA 1978; or criminal sexual contact of a minor, as provided in Section 30-9-13 NMSA 1978;
B. release the defendant from custody and dismiss with prejudice the charges against him; or
C. dismiss the criminal case without prejudice in the interest of justice. If the treatment supervisor has issued a report finding that the defendant satisfies the criteria for involuntary commitment contained in the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code [43-1-2 NMSA 1978], the department of health shall commence proceedings pursuant to Chapter 43, Article 1 NMSA 1978, and the court may order the defendant confined for a maximum of seven days to facilitate preparation and initiation of a petition pursuant to the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code. The district court may refer the defendant to the district attorney for possible initiation of proceedings under the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Cod
(This is me now) The New Mexico Law also is very clear about when the defendant is found fit and states that " If the district court finds the defendant to be competent, the district court
shall set the matter for trial, provided that if the defendant is in need of
continued care or treatment and the supervisor of the defendant's treatment
agrees to continue to provide it, the district court may enter any order it
deems appropriate for the continued care or treatment of the defendant by the
facility or program pending the conclusion of the criminal proceedings." in no event, assuming that the worse case scenario would have been a finding of unfitness would your friend be permitted to remain unprosecuted for more than 9 months at a time without a new evaluation for compentency.