Chaudhry

United States v. Chaudhry

Good Law
646 F. Supp. 2d 1140·2009 WL 2524240·104 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 6198·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76104
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 17, 2009C 03-40210 CRBCalifornia4,471 words

Opinion

Opinion

Breyer, J.

ORDER

The issue before the Court is whether a defendant who has been convicted but not yet sentenced may be subject to a competency determination as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 4241 , or whether 18 U.S.C. § 4244 is the only provision that is operative at this stage in the proceedings. After carefully considering the submissions of the parties and with the benefit of oral argument, the Court holds that the competency standard in § 4241 does apply in these circumstances.

BACKGROUND

On June 13, 2008, Defendant Mohammad Yousuf Chaudhry was convicted on sixteen counts related to tax fraud. On September 10, 2008, Defendant submitted an ex parte application to continue sentencing so that he could undergo a psychiatric examination. The Court granted the application the next day. At no point before or during Defendant’s trial had counsel raised the issue of Defendant’s competency, nor has any party suggested that Defendant was incompetent to stand trial. The instant proceedings have focused solely on Defendant’s mental capacity for the period post-conviction and before sentencing.

The parties appeared for hearings on November 5 and November 12, 2008, to discuss the results of the doctor’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.