United States v. Garcia , 191 F. App'x 302 ( 2006 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
July 21, 2006
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________ Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-41541
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
GUILLERMO GARCIA, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:03-CR-1394-ALL
_________________________________________________________________
Before JOLLY, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant Guillermo Garcia was charged with transporting an
illegal alien within the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. §
1324(a)(1)(A)(ii). Garcia challenged his competency to stand trial
due to the continuing impairment he suffers as a result of a
traumatic brain injury. The district court, after conducting an
evidentiary hearing, found Garcia competent to stand trial,
notwithstanding Garcia’s obvious comprehension and communication
difficulties. Garcia then entered a guilty plea subject to a
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
reservation of the right to appeal the district court’s competency
determination. This appeal ensued.
Expert witnesses have reached conflicting conclusions as to
Garcia’s competency to stand trial. However, none of the experts
have conducted objective tests to determine the extent to which
Garcia has the ability “to assist properly in his defense,” 18
U.S.C. § 4241(d) (2005), nor have they conducted such tests to
determine his ability to comprehend. Further, no explanation has
been provided as to why such objective testing cannot be done or
would not provide meaningful results. Although the record
indicates Garcia is unable to learn traditional sign language, the
record does not reflect any attempts to enhance Garcia’s ability to
communicate through a more formal method of sign language, nor any
objective testing to determine if such was possible. These
omissions leave us with serious concerns as to the voluntariness of
Garcia’s plea, and his competency to stand trial. We therefore
vacate the conviction and sentence and remand for further
proceedings.
VACATED and REMANDED.
2