What is the test for a jury to determine if a defendant is mentally unfit to stand trial for a life sentence?

custody and the indefinite abeyance of her criminal case. Defendant further contends that she was entitled to the proposed instruction under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of the argument, defendant cites the high courts decision in Simmons v. South Carolina (1994) 512 U.S. 154, 168169, 114 S.Ct. 2187, 129 L.Ed.2d 133 (plur. opn. of Blackmun, J.) and its progeny, holding that, where future dangerousness is at issue, a capital defendant has a due process right to inform the jury that he or she will be ineligible for parole if sentenced to life imprisonment.

[430 P.3d 1209]

We have previously rejected arguments similar to defendants, and do so again here. In People v. Marks (2003) 31 Cal.4th 197, 2 Cal.Rptr.3d 252, 72 P.3d 1222, for example, the defendant sought a similar instruction stating, in relevant part: " If the defendant is found mentally incompetent

[240 Cal.Rptr.3d 738]