United States v. Blackhawk
8:16-cr-00216
D. Neb.Oct 30, 2017Background
- Defendant Ramona Wolfe moved for a reevaluation of her mental competency to stand trial, assist in her defense, and enter a plea, requesting Dr. Matthew Huss perform the exam.
- The motion was considered under 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a)–(b), which permits a competency hearing and authorizes the court to order a psychiatric/psychological examination under § 4247(b)–(c).
- The Court held a hearing on October 30, 2017, and concluded there was reasonable cause to believe Wolfe may presently be suffering from a mental disease or defect affecting competency.
- The Court granted the motion to the extent it ordered a licensed mental health professional to perform a competency evaluation and produce a written report but denied Wolfe’s request that Dr. Matthew Huss be the examiner.
- The Court appointed Terry A. Davis, M.D., J.D., F.A.P.A., to conduct the evaluation and specified the content and disclosure requirements for the competency report under § 4247(c).
- The Court set an evidentiary competency hearing to follow receipt of the report and excluded time under the Speedy Trial Act pending resolution of competency.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a new competency evaluation should be ordered | Government did not oppose an evaluation; court must act if reasonable cause exists under § 4241(a) | Wolfe requested a reexamination and specifically requested Dr. Matthew Huss as examiner | Court found reasonable cause and ordered a new evaluation but denied the request for Dr. Huss |
| Who should perform the competency evaluation | (Implicit) Court discretion to appoint a qualified examiner under § 4241(b)/§ 4247 | Wolfe asked for a particular examiner (Dr. Huss) | Court exercised its discretion and appointed Terry A. Davis, M.D., J.D., F.A.P.A. |
| Required contents and dissemination of the evaluation report | Ensure compliance with § 4247(c) and provide report to parties | N/A (requested evaluation and report) | Court mandated the § 4247(c) contents and filing/provision to counsel |
| Effect on Speedy Trial time computation | Interest-of-justice exclusion appropriate while competency unresolved | N/A | Time excluded under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(A) pending competency determination |