Flores-Nava

United States v. Flores-Nava

Good Law
21 F. App'x 644
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 19, 2001No. 00-10243; D.C. No. CR-98-00281-CRBCalifornia936 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Alfredo Flores-Nava (“Flores”) appeals his jury conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) for being a deported alien found in the United States. Flores argues that the district judge clearly erred in finding that he was competent to stand trial. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

DISCUSSION

Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case we repeat them here only where necessary to explain our decision. A defendant is competent to stand trial if he “has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding ... [and] a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.” Cooper v. Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 348, 354 , 116 S.Ct. 1373 , 134 L.Ed.2d 498 (1996) (citation omitted). We review for clear error a district judge’s determination that *646 a defendant is competent to stand trial. See United States v. Chischilly, 30 F.3d 1144, 1150 (9th Cir.1994).

The district judge’s finding that Flores was competent to stand trial is fully supported by the record. Two professionals examined Flores before his trial, and both of these individuals…

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.