IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-40703
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
OBED CARDENAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-97-CR-320-ALL
- - - - - - - - - -
June 16, 1999
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Obed Cardenas appeals from his bench-trial conviction for
illegal entry into the United States after deportation. He
argues that the district court erred by finding that he was
competent to stand trial. A district court’s competency finding
is a mixed question of law and fact that requires this court to
“‘re-analyze the facts and take a hard look at the trial judge’s
ultimate conclusion’” but should not be reversed unless it is
“‘clearly arbitrary or unwarranted.’” United States v. Doke, 171
F.3d 240, 247 (5th Cir. 1999)(citations omitted).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 98-40703
-2-
A defendant is incompetent to stand trial if he suffers from
“a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to
the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and
consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly
in his defense.” 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d). The court-ordered
psychiatric evaluation concluded that Cardenas had “borderline
mental problems” but had “sufficient, present ability to
understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against
him” and was “aware of the difference between right and wrong.”
Cardenas did not present any contrary evidence at the psychiatric
evaluation hearing. The district court therefore did not err in
finding that Cardenas was competent to stand trial.
Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.