United States of America, v. Robert G. Soucy, Jr.

2025 DNH 008

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: January 30, 2025
• Docket: 23-cr-81-SM-AJ-1
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America,

v. Case No. 23-cr-81-SM-AJ-1 Opinion No. 2025 DNH 008 Robert G. Soucy, Jr.

O R D E R

Defendant, a physician by training, is charged with

unlawfully, knowingly, and intentionally distributing controlled

substances by issuing prescriptions not supported by legitimate

medical needs or purposes. As a preliminary matter, defendant

suggests that he is not competent to stand trial (18 U.S.C.

§ 4241). An evidentiary hearing was held to determine whether

1) defendant has the present ability to consult with his counsel

with a reasonable degree of rational understanding; and 2)

whether he has a rational will as factual understanding of the

proceedings against him. Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402

(1960).

The parties agree that Dr. Soucy does have a rational and

factual understanding of the proceedings against him, but

disagree about his present ability to consult with counsel with

a reasonable degree of rational understanding. Dr. Kendra L.

Bryant and Dr. Robert L. Denney testified as expert witnesses

with respect to Dr. Soucy’s present condition. They generally

agreed that Dr. Soucy suffers from some degree of cognitive impairment, due to a neurodegenerative disease process (perhaps

a form of dementia), that has shown signs of slow decline. The

condition results in disorganization, forgetfulness, memory

impairment, and some focusing issues. While Dr. Bryant is of

the opinion that Dr. Soucy is basically competent (with the

assistance of family), she doubts his ability to assist counsel,

especially absent family support. Dr. Denney concurs in the

medical assessment (cognitive disorder) but points out that

testing suggests a mild condition (currently), slow progress,

and a reasonable ability to both comprehend questions and

provide answers with a reasonable degree of rational

understanding.

I am persuaded that Dr. Denney’s current assessment is

correct and that Dr. Soucy is currently able to assist counsel,

consult with him with a reasonable degree of rational

understanding, and respond effectively to inquiries about

events, documents, and records related to his defense. That is

not to say that his condition will remain stable, but only that

he is presently competent to assist counsel and to stand trial.

Future testing or supplemental diagnoses may warrant revisiting

the issue should defendant’s condition deteriorate more rapidly

than anticipated.

2 Conclusion

Defendant is competent to stand trial.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________ Steven J. McAuliffe United States District Judge

January 30, 2025

cc: Counsel of Record U.S. Probation U.S. Marshal