Opinion
CRIMINAL 4:21CR198
11-06-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JEFFREY MONTANEZ (1)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT'S COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL
AILEEN GOLDMAN DURRETT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, this criminal proceeding is before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge.
On April 4, 2023, Defendant's counsel filed Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Psychiatric and/or Psychological Evaluation [Dkt. #33], seeking a psychiatric examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §4241 at an appropriate Bureau of Prisons facility and that a psychiatric report of the findings consistent with 18 U.S.C. § 4247(c) be filed with the court. The court granted that motion on April 21, 2023 [Dkt. #34]. Defendant was subsequently evaluated by Dr. Samuel Browning, Ph.D. The court has received the report from the Bureau of Prisons, and copies have been furnished to the Assistant United States Attorney and defense counsel.
A competency hearing was conducted on November 6, 2023, before U.S. Magistrate Judge Aileen Goldman Durrett, during which the report was admitted. At the hearing, Defendant appeared in court with his counsel, Cadoc Artemio “Tim” Menchu. Defendant was given the opportunity to present evidence and call witnesses. Defendant did not offer any witnesses or evidence. Moreover, Defendant did not present any objections to the report, including Dr. Browning's opinion on competency. The Government also did not object to the report findings.
Dr. Browning's report concludes that “The defendant does not appear to suffer from a mental disease or defect rendering him unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to properly assist in his defense. Prognosis for continued competency is positive.
Mr. Montanez is diagnosed with an unspecified bipolar and related disorder, the symptoms of which appear to be associated with episodes of mood disturbance and, possibly, interpersonal difficulties. These symptoms, however, do not appear to be currently causing clinically significant deficits in his functioning. During the current evaluation, he was largely able to function appropriately, apart from his possible involvement in a physical altercation. Presently, his symptoms do not appear to prevent him from understanding the nature of his current legal circumstances, advocating for himself, and/or communicating with counsel.” The undersigned has considered the report and concludes that Defendant is not mentally incompetent, is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him, and is able to properly assist in his defense. Defendant has a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against him and presently has sufficient ability to consult with his attorney while having a reasonable degree of rational understanding. 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d); see also Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).
RECOMMENDATION
For the foregoing reasons, the court recommends that Defendant be found competent to stand trial because he understands the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him and is able to assist in his defense. See 18 U.S.C. § 4241. It is further recommended that the speedy trial time be excluded from April 4, 2023 (the date Defendant filed his Motion to Determine Mental Competency), until the date on which the District Judge signs the order adopting this report and recommendation.