In People v. Samuel (1981) 29 Cal. 3d 489, the California Supreme Court found it unnecessary to decide the question before us--whether a criminal defendant can assert the Fifth Amendment at a section 1368 hearing--but noted the "intricate and apparently tangled web of precedents relevant to the existence and extent of the privilege against self-incrimination in section 1368 hearings." (Samuel, at p. 496, fn. 3.) In People v. Samuel, supra, 29 Cal. 3d 489, 495 the Supreme Court applied this reasoning to the decision of defense counsel to question competency, stating that the defendant's attorney "cannot be expected to seek approval of strategic decisions made in the course of obtaining and presenting proof of incompetence."