United States v. Taylor
This text of United States v. Taylor (United States v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-10505 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ADDIS CHARLES TAYLOR,
Defendant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CR-19-1-Y -------------------- January 4, 2000
Before REAVLEY, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Addis Charles Taylor appeals the district court’s
determination that he was competent to stand trial. A defendant
is incompetent if he suffers from “a mental disease or defect
rendering him ... unable to understand the nature and
consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly
in his defense.” See United States v. Doke, 171 F.3d 240, 246
(5th Cir. 1999)(quoting 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d), cert. denied, 120 S.
Ct. 250 (1999); Malinauskas v. United States, 505 F.2d 649, 654
(5th Cir. 1974). The Government bears the burden of proving
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 99-10505 -2-
competence by a preponderance of the evidence. See United States
v. DiGilio, 538 F.2d 972, 987-88 (5th Cir. 1976). A district
court’s determination of competency will not be reversed unless
it is clearly arbitrary or unwarranted. Doke, 171 F.3d at 246.
Because we find no such error in this case, the judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Taylor, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-taylor-ca5-2000.