Judge Boyd Orders Mental-health Referral, Medical Release and Portable Alcohol Monitor for Defendant Martinez
Loading...
Summary
Judge Stephanie Boyd directed probation to refer defendant Richard Trevino Martinez to Center for Healthcare Services, required a medical release and an affidavit of non‑driving, and ordered the defendant to obtain a portable alcohol-monitoring device by June 3, with a return hearing June 24.
SAN ANTONIO — The 187th District Court ordered a coordinated plan to address mental-health and substance-use concerns for defendant Richard Trevino Martinez (recorded on the docket as "Mister Martinez").
At a probation status hearing, staff and the court discussed Martinez’s medical and mental-health history, missed appointments and whether he had a case manager. The court learned that Martinez had been removed from felony drug court and returned to a regular caseload because of a physical limitation; probation reported recent efforts to locate services and recommended a referral to the Center for Healthcare Services for diagnostic evaluation.
Judge Stephanie Boyd directed probation to obtain Martinez’s medical records with a signed medical-release form, prepare an affidavit confirming non-driving and non-ownership of a vehicle, and arrange a portable alcohol-monitoring device (portable ignition interlock or equivalent) to be in place no later than June 3. The judge set a follow-up hearing for June 24 for an update on Martinez’s medical evaluation, TAP/Treatment assessment results and whether further drug-treatment measures are needed.
Martinez told the court he has missed appointments in the past and that his sister had been assisting him; the sister participated in the hearing and confirmed she had been helping. Probation agreed to seek referrals and to coordinate mental-health records so the court and probation could better address Martinez’s needs and conditions of supervision.
Judge Boyd instructed Martinez that he must sign releases so probation can obtain medical and mental-health information and that failure to comply could result in further court action. The court also set the portable-device deadline to June 3 and scheduled the follow-up status for June 24.
No formal sentencing occurred at the hearing; the court’s orders were procedural and meant to inform supervision and possible treatment placement.
