Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Kumar, 4:17-CR-5-FL-1. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina Number: infdco20180222e89 Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2018
Summary: ORDER ROBERT B. JONES, JR. , Magistrate Judge . This matter came before the court February 20, 2018, for a hearing on the competency of Defendant Sanjay Kumar ("Defendant") to determine whether Defendant is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him and to assist properly in his defense, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 4142 and 4247(d). At the hearing the government was represented by Assistant United States Attorney Scott Lemmon and Defendant, who was pre
More

ORDER

This matter came before the court February 20, 2018, for a hearing on the competency of Defendant Sanjay Kumar ("Defendant") to determine whether Defendant is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him and to assist properly in his defense, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §§ 4142 and 4247(d). At the hearing the government was represented by Assistant United States Attorney Scott Lemmon and Defendant, who was present in the courtroom, was represented by Deborah Newton. The court advised Defendant of his rights under 18 U.S.C. § 4247(d). The government then referred to the Forensic Evaluation Addendum ("Forensic Evaluation"), dated February 8, 2018, which was prepared by Dawn Graney, Psy. D., a Commitment and Treatment Forensic Psychologist with the Federal Correctional Institution-Butner. The Forensic Evaluation has been filed under seal and was provided to counsel and defense counsel discussed its findings with Defendant prior to the. hearing.

According to the Forensic Evaluation, Defendant has been diagnosed with Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, but that despite the disorder, Defendant is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him and to assist properly in his defense. Neither party disputed the findings and conclusions of the Forensic Evaluation and neither party presented any further evidence.

After consideration of the position of the parties and the Forensic Evaluation, the court does not find by a preponderance of the evidence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4141(d), that Defendant is presently suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense.

So ordered.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer