Can a defendant with a long history of aberrant behaviour be found competent to stand trial?

Admittedly, even this long history of aberrant behavior could be consistent with present competence to stand trial: "more is required to raise a doubt (about competence) than mere bizarre actions (citation) or bizarre statements (citation) or ... psychiatric testimony that defendant is immature, dangerous, psychopathic, or homicidal or such diagnosis with little reference to defendant's ability to assist in his own defense." (People v. Laudermilk, supra, 67 Cal.2d 272, 285, 61 Cal.Rptr. 644, 431 P.2d 228.) As noted above, a person is incompetent to stand trial only if he is unable either to understand the nature and purpose of the proceedings against him or to rationally assist counsel in the conduct of the defense. But here the experts did focus specifically on how Samuel's mental infirmities affected his ability to understand the proceedings and to assist his attorney.