U.S. v. OATTES, 1:12-CR-13. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20120727b60
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 06, 2012
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MILLIAM B. MITCHELL CARTER, Magistrate Judge. A June 8, 2012, letter from Rebecca Tamez, Warden of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Correctional Institution in Fort Worth, Texas, and Psychological Evaluation of defendant Cramell Oattes were received by the undersigned magistrate judge. It is the opinion of the examiner that defendant appears competent to stand trial and does not appear to suffer from a severe mental disease or defect that would have impaired hi
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MILLIAM B. MITCHELL CARTER, Magistrate Judge. A June 8, 2012, letter from Rebecca Tamez, Warden of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Correctional Institution in Fort Worth, Texas, and Psychological Evaluation of defendant Cramell Oattes were received by the undersigned magistrate judge. It is the opinion of the examiner that defendant appears competent to stand trial and does not appear to suffer from a severe mental disease or defect that would have impaired his..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MILLIAM B. MITCHELL CARTER, Magistrate Judge.
A June 8, 2012, letter from Rebecca Tamez, Warden of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Correctional Institution in Fort Worth, Texas, and Psychological Evaluation of defendant Cramell Oattes were received by the undersigned magistrate judge. It is the opinion of the examiner that defendant appears competent to stand trial and does not appear to suffer from a severe mental disease or defect that would have impaired his ability to appreciate the nature, quality, or wrongfulness of his behavior at the time of the offense.
A Notice of Waiver of Competency Hearing signed by defendant and submitted by Atty. Anthony Martinez was filed on July 5, 2012. The Court RECOMMENDS on the basis of the waiver and the report that defendant Cramell Oattes be found competent to stand trial.1
FootNotes
1. Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be served and filed within fourteen (14) days after service of a copy of this recommended disposition on the objecting party. Such objections must conform to the requirements of Rule 59(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Failure to file objections within the time specified waives the right to appeal the District Court's order. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 88 L.Ed.2d 435, 106 S.Ct. 466 (1985). The district court need not provide de novo review where objections to this report and recommendation are frivolous, conclusive or general. Mira v. Marshall, 806 F.2d 636 (6th Cir. 1986). Only specific objections are reserved for appellate review. Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers, 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987).
Source: Leagle
