DAVID M. LAWSON, District Judge.
On February 22, 2016, defendant Kenneth Smith pleaded guilty to conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) and failure to appear in court, 18 U.S.C. § 3146(a)(1), and his sentencing hearing was scheduled for June 2, 2016. Thereafter, Smith's attorney's motion to withdraw was granted and new counsel was appointed to represent Smith under the Criminal Justice Act on August 1, 2016. New counsel sought a psychological evaluation of the defendant to aid in preparing a sentencing memorandum. Smith was evaluated in the Sanilac County Jail on September 9, 2016 by Jennifer Zoltowski, a limited license psychologist. After the evaluation, Ms. Zoltkowski expressed concern about Smith's ability to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against him, due to his history of abuse as a child, an early history of drug abuse, and an extremely low intelligence quotient.
Thereafter, counsel for the defendant filed a motion for a competency evaluation on October 21, 2016, asking that the sentencing not proceed until the defendant's competency can be determined under 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d). The Court held a hearing on the motion on November 8, 2016. After review of the motion and the report of Ms. Zoltkowski, the Court determined that there was reasonable cause to believe that the defendant may be suffering from a mental disease or defect that may render him incompetent to stand trial or otherwise proceed in the case within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a) & (d). As a result, the Court directed that a competency examination take place and adjourned the sentencing hearing without date.
The defendant was transported to an appropriate facility and underwent a psychological evaluation by an examiner retained by the government. The examiner prepared a report, which was submitted to the Court. Subsequently, on March 8, 2017, the defendant filed a motion for a competency hearing and for an independent evaluation of the defendant's mental condition. On April 26, 2017, the Court held a hearing on the defendant's motion for a hearing and to appoint an examiner to conduct an independent evaluation. At the end of the hearing, the Court announced from the bench its decision to grant the defendant's motion.
Accordingly, it is
It is further
It is further
It is further