762 F.3d 538
6th Cir.2014Background
- Heard ran a large cocaine-distribution operation in Kentucky and laundered proceeds through numerous payments and asset purchases.
- Heard was indicted on conspiracy, distribution, possession with intent, firearm, and money-laundering offenses; Stephens was appointed to represent him.
- Heard refused counsel, queried competency, and a competency evaluation was ordered by the district court.
- Dr. Judith Campbell conducted a six-week evaluation, finding Heard capable of understanding legal proceedings and consulting with counsel, despite a personality-disorder diagnosis.
- Heard chose to represent himself after a lengthy colloquy, the court warned him of the dangers of self-representation, and Heard stipulated to competency.
- At trial Heard was convicted on most counts; the district court sentenced him to 360 months; Heard appealed arguing competency hearing and voluntary waiver issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to sua sponte conduct a competency hearing was an abuse | Heard argues judge should have held a hearing after competency doubts. | Heard contends evaluation was insufficient and more inquiry was required. | No abuse; competency findings supported the decision. |
| Whether Heard’s waiver of counsel was knowing and intelligent | Waiver was not knowing and intelligent due to treatment and circumstances. | Record shows extensive questioning and warnings; waiver was knowing and intelligent. | Waiver was knowingly and intelligently made. |
| Whether Heard was competent to represent himself under Edwards | Edwards suggests possible incompetence to proceed without counsel. | Distinguishes Edwards; no severe mental illness shown; capable to proceed self-represented. | District court did not err; Heard not shown to be incompetent to represent himself. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Denkins, 367 F.3d 537 (6th Cir. 2004) (must inquire when reasonable cause to doubt competency)
- Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (S. Ct. 1960) (defining competency to stand trial)
- United States v. Ross, 703 F.3d 856 (6th Cir. 2012) (abuse of discretion standard for competency hearing)
- U.S. v. Miller, 531 F.3d 340 (6th Cir. 2008) (defendant not incompetent solely due to attorney conflict)
- Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (S. Ct. 2008) (competency standards for standing trial vs. self-representation)