Summary
In State v. Frank, 96-1136 (La. 10/4/96), 679 So.2d 1365, the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that Cooper invalidated 1990 La. Acts No. 755, amending LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 648 to require a finding of incompetency by "clear and convincing evidence."
Summary of this case from State v. RaymondOpinion
No. 96-K-1136
October 4, 1996
IN RE: Frank, Curtis J.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Number CR95-1101; Parish of Evangeline 13th Judicial District Court Div. "A" Number 49,326F
Granted in part; denied in part. The Supreme Court's decision in Cooper v. Oklahoma, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 1373, 134 L.Ed.2d 498 (1996) makes clear that La.C.Cr.P. art. 648 (A), as amended by 1990 La. Acts. No. 755, violates the Due Process Claude to the extent that it requires the defendant in a criminal prosecution to prove his incompetency to stand trial by clear and convincing evidence. Cooper has returned Louisiana to this Court's jurisprudential rule that a criminal defendant need prove his incapacity to proceed only by a clear preponderance of the evidence. State v. Brooks, 541 So.2d 801, 805 (La. 1989); State v. Machon, 410 So.2d 1065, 1067 (La. 1982). The trial court's ruling is therefore vacated and this case is remanded for retrial of the competency hearing. The defendant may appeal once more from an adverse ruling on the question of his competency to stand trial. In all other respects, the application is denied.
WFM
PFC
HTL
CDK
BJJ
JPV
WATSON, J. not on panel.
BLEICH, J. would deny the writ.