Navarro-Fletes

United States v. Navarro-Fletes

Good Law
49 F. App'x 732
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 24, 2002No. 01-30247; D.C. No. CR-00-00167-RHWCalifornia753 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant Roberto Navarro-Fletes was convicted and sentenced for being an alien found in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 , and he appeals on numerous grounds. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Navarro-Fletes claims that the district court erred by failing to order competency hearings at trial and sentencing sua sponte. The district judge must hold a competency hearing if “the evidence before him raises a bona fide doubt about [Navarro-Fletes’] competence to stand trial, even if defense counsel does not ask for one.” Odle v. Woodford, 238 F.3d 1084, 1087 (9th Cir.2001). A bona fide doubt exists where there is “substantial evidence” of the defendant’s incompetence. United States v. Lewis, 991 F.2d 524, 527 (9th Cir.1993).

The evidence here did not raise such a bona fide doubt. Navarro-Fletes’ treatment for psychiatric problems was brief and years ago, and his most recent hallucinations and manic depression predated the trial by half a year. He effectively communicated with his attorney at both trial and sentencing, and any uncertainty he expressed appears to have been based upon the complexity of…

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.