Filed: Jan. 24, 2014
Latest Update: Jan. 24, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER RE COMPTENCY EVALUATION OF DEFENDANT STIPULATION JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge. STIPULATION Counsel for Daniel Lee Bonnett, Kresta Nora Daly, presently declares a doubt that defendant Mr. Bonnett is competent to aid in preparation for trial or otherwise assist in the preparation of his defense. A defendant is mentally incompetent to stand trial if he suffers from a mental disease or defect which impairs his (1) "sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer wi
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER RE COMPTENCY EVALUATION OF DEFENDANT STIPULATION JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge. STIPULATION Counsel for Daniel Lee Bonnett, Kresta Nora Daly, presently declares a doubt that defendant Mr. Bonnett is competent to aid in preparation for trial or otherwise assist in the preparation of his defense. A defendant is mentally incompetent to stand trial if he suffers from a mental disease or defect which impairs his (1) "sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer wit..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE COMPTENCY EVALUATION OF DEFENDANT STIPULATION
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
STIPULATION
Counsel for Daniel Lee Bonnett, Kresta Nora Daly, presently declares a doubt that defendant Mr. Bonnett is competent to aid in preparation for trial or otherwise assist in the preparation of his defense.
A defendant is mentally incompetent to stand trial if he suffers from a mental disease or defect which impairs his (1) "sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding" or (2) leaves him lacking a "rational as well as factual understanding" of both the charges against him and the nature of the judicial proceedings. (Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 402 (1960).)
Defense counsel does not believe Mr. Bonnett possesses sufficient present ability to rationally consult with counsel.
If a bona fide doubt about a defendant's mental competency exists, the District Court must hold a competency hearing. The first step is to order a competency evaluation. In doing so, the court has two options. It may order that the competency evaluation be done locally (i.e., in or near the city in which the court sits) and appoint one or more local mental health professionals to conduct a mental competency evaluation. Alternatively the court may commit the defendant to custody for the evaluation to be conducted in an appropriate facility closest to the court. (18 U.S.C. §§ 4241(b), 4247(b).)
The Assistant United States Attorney, Matthew Morris, has been informed of defense counsel's concerns. Mr. Morris agrees under the circumstances it is appropriate for this Court to order a competency evaluation.
The parties stipulate time is excluded pursuant to 18 USC §4244 as well as Local Code A from the date of this order until the return of the competency evaluation and a hearing on the same is held.
Dated: January 23, 2014 Respectfully submitted,
BARTH TOZER & DALY LLP
KRESTA NORA DALY
Attorneys for DANIEL BONNETT
Dated: January 23, 2014.
MATTHEW G. MORRIS
Assistant United States Attorney
ORDER
Good cause appearing this court orders Mr. Bonnett be committed pursuant to 18 USC §4247 for a competency evaluation. This court further orders time excluded pursuant to 18 USC §4244 and Local Code A from the date of this order until such time as a professional competency evaluation is prepared and a hearing may be held regarding the same.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
