Lazo-Romero

MEMORANDUM *

David Lazo-Romero appeals his jury trial conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction to review this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court is required to hold a competency hearing only if it has a “bona fide” doubt as to the defendant’s competency. Williams v. Woodford, 384 F.3d 567, 603-04 (9th Cir.2004). The district court ordered a psychiatric evaluation of Lazo-Romero after the government raised a doubt as to the defendant’s competency to assist in his own defense. See 18 U.S.C. § 4241 . At no time did the district court, Lazo-Romero, his stand-by counsel, or his paralegal express any concern over Lazo-Romero’s competency. Because the psychiatric evaluation concluded that Lazo-Romero was competent to stand trial, the district court, having no reasonable cause to believe that LazoRomero was incompetent, was not required to hold a formal hearing. 1 Williams, 384 F.3d at 605.

While we leave open the question as to whether in other circumstances a district court should appoint counsel to represent a pro se defendant while his competency is at issue, here the government was the…