People of the Territory of Guam v. Teddy Paulino Taitano

Arthur Teddy Paulino Taitano appeals a Guam Superior Court ruling that he was competent to stand trial.

We will reverse a court’s determination that the defendant is competent to stand trial only if it is clearly erroneous. United States v. Lindley, 774 F.2d 993 , 993 n. * (9th Cir.1985) (per curiam).

After thoroughly reviewing the record, we find that the Superior Court’s ruling that Taitano was competent to stand trial was not clearly erroneous. The Superior Court had before it the opinions of four experts. Dr. Langsley concluded that Taitano was competent to stand trial. Both Dr. Kallingal and Dr. Balajadia concluded that Taitano was not mentally ill. Dr. Kallingal noted that Taitano appeared to be attempting to manipulate the psychological test and “making extra efforts to put on a facade of a retarded person.” Dr. Balajadia concluded that Taitano was malingering. Only Dr. Geren concluded that Taitano was not competent to stand trial.

Taitano contends that the Superior Court erred because (1) his attorney stated that Taitano was unwilling to cooperate or participate in his defense, (2) Dr. Geren’s opinion that Taitano is incompetent to stand trial contradicts those of the…