PATEL v. INCH
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The report and recommendation 24 is accepted and adopted, over Petitioner's objections, as this Court's opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, The amended petition for writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 16, is DENIED. The Clerk shall also close the file. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 11/21/2022. (tpm)
Case 4:20-cv-00023-MW-HTC Document 27 Filed 11/21/22 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
RAKESH K. PATEL,
Case No. 4:20cv23-MW/HTC
RICKY D. DIXON,
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation, ECF No. 24, and has also reviewed de novo Petitioner’s
objections to the report and recommendation, ECF No. 26. Specifically, Petitioner
objects to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that his substantive incompetency
claim be denied without an evidentiary hearing. This argument fails. Petitioner’s
argument about the impropriety of weighing evidence prior to an evidentiary hearing
is well-taken. However, the well-reasoned report and recommendation notes that
Petitioner’s proffer consists of a lone affidavit from a psychiatrist hired to perform
a post-hoc review of Petitioner’s competency at the time of trial. See ECF No. 24 at
18. Setting aside the potential speculation on the proffer, it still falls short of showing
“clear and convincing evidence creating a real, substantial and legitimate doubt as
to his competence to stand trial.” See id. at 17, 20–21 (quoting Medina v. Singletary,
Case 4:20-cv-00023-MW-HTC Document 27 Filed 11/21/22 Page 2 of 2
59 F.3d 1095, 1106 (11th Cir. 1995)). This Court agrees. The psychiatrist’s lone
affidavit, without more, 1 does not “ ‘positively, unequivocally, and clearly’ generate
doubt” as to Petitioner’s competence to stand trial. See Medina, 59 F.3d at 1106.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted, over Petitioner’s
objections, as this Court’s opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, “The
amended petition for writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 16, is DENIED.”
The Clerk shall also close the file.
SO ORDERED on November 21, 2022.
s/Mark E. Walker
Chief United States District Judge
As the Magistrate Judge points out, Dr. Gadh’s declaration “does not point to any
evidence showing [Petitioner] lacked the ability to assist counsel and participate in his defense,
making this case very different from James v. Singletary, 957 F.2d 1562 (11th Cir. 1992) . . . .”
ECF No. 24 at 20. Further, unlike the petitioner in James, state courts made several factual findings
supporting Petitioner’s competency. Id. Finally, Patel does not proffer any evidence indicating that
he stopped taking his medications or what impact that would have had on his ability to participate
in his defense or communicate with counsel. Id. at 21.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?