United States v. Moises Pacheco Camacho

983 F.2d 1079 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Moises Pacheco CAMACHO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-30121. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 17, 1992. * Decided Jan. 13, 1993. Before CHOY, SNEED and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Defendant Pacheco-Camacho was convicted of illegally reentering this country after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . On appeal, the defendant argues that the Due Process Clause was violated by the district court's failure to order a competency hearing, and also that his legal representation was inadequate because his attorney failed to request a competency hearing. We find these arguments without merit, and we affirm. 3 The conviction of a defendant who is not competent to stand trial violates due process. Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 378 (1966). A defendant is competent to stand trial if he "has sufficient present ability to…