What is the evidentiary standard for determining whether a defendant is competent to stand at a new competency hearing?

competency hearing unless it 'is presented with a substantial change of circumstances or with new evidence' casting a serious doubt on the validity of that finding." (Id. at pp. 1152-1153; accord, People v. Rodas (2018) 6 Cal.5th 219, 230-231.) The evidentiary standard by which the trial court evaluates defense counsel's showing is substantial evidence. If counsel presents a substantial change of circumstances or new evidence giving rise to a serious doubt about the validity of the original competency finding, the trial court must suspend the criminal proceeding and reinstate competency proceedings. (Rodas, supra, 6 Cal.5th at p. 231.)

"We apply a deferential standard of review to a trial court's ruling concerning whether another competency hearing must be held. [Citation.] We review such a determination for substantial evidence in support of it." (People v. Huggins (2006) 38 Cal.4th 175, 220.) "More is required than just bizarre actions or statements by the defendant to raise a doubt of competency. [Citations.] In addition, a reviewing court generally gives great deference to a trial court's decision whether to hold a competency hearing." (People v. Marshall (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1, 33.)