Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_99-cv-02016/USCOURTS-azd-2_99-cv-02016-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 In Rohan, the Ninth Circuit held that the statutory right to counsel during

capital habeas proceedings implies a statutory right for a petitioner to be competent for those

proceedings. The court indicated that a district court must stay further habeas proceedings

“where an incompetent capital habeas petitioner raises claims that could potentially benefit

from his ability to communicate rationally.” Id. at 819.

2 In Rohan, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the district court abused its

discretion in not staying the habeas proceeding after the district court concluded that the

petitioner was incompetent to assist counsel. Rohan, 334 F.3d at 813-14. 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ernest Valencia Gonzales, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Dora B. Schriro, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-99-2016-PHX-SMM

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER

Pursuant to Rohan v. Woodford, 334 F.3d 803 (9th Cir. 2003),1

 Petitioner has moved

the Court to order a competency evaluation and/or an evidentiary hearing to determine

whether he is competent to assist habeas counsel. (Dkt. 102.) Further, Petitioner requests

that the Court stay these proceedings while his competency is being litigated and, if the Court

concludes that Petitioner is incompetent, until such time as he is found to be competent.2

(Id.) 

Case 2:99-cv-02016-SMM Document 111 Filed 09/25/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

In support of his motion for a competency evaluation, Petitioner has submitted a

number of psychological evaluations from state post-conviction proceedings held in 2001.

(Dkt. 102.) These evaluations diagnosed Petitioner as having a paranoid schizophrenic

disorder. (See id. at Ex. D-H.) Petitioner acknowledges that, due to the lapse of time since

the evaluations, his evidence of incompetency is dated. (Dkt. 108, Ex. 8.)

The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s mental health reports from 2001, which indicate

that he suffered from a psychological disorder. (Dkt. 102, Ex. D-H.) However, these reports

also indicate that Petitioner’s psychological symptoms have not been treated. (Id.) It is

unclear whether the reason for the lack of treatment is due to Petitioner’s refusal to cooperate

or some other cause. 

Based on the absence of a current mental health evaluation and the potential effects

of a lack of psychiatric treatment, the Court cannot resolve at this time whether Petitioner is

entitled to a comprehensive competency determination and/or an evidentiary hearing. In

order to make that determination, the Court requires current mental heath reports from both

parties regarding Petitioner’s psychiatric condition. These reports shall address Petitioner’s

competence to assist counsel. They shall also include an evaluation of the effect on

Petitioner’s competence of an appropriate regimen of psychiatric medication. 

In reporting on Petitioner’s competence to assist counsel, the parties shall utilize the

competence standard established in Rohan. The Rohan court indicated that an incompetent

capital habeas petitioner is a petitioner who cannot assist statutory counsel because he is

incapable of rational communication. 334 F.3d at 810.

 With respect to Petitioner’s motion for a stay of the proceedings, the Court cannot

determine whether a stay is appropriate until a final determination is made regarding

Petitioner’s competence to assist counsel. 

Accordingly,

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 2:99-cv-02016-SMM Document 111 Filed 09/25/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than November 15, 2006, counsel for

Petitioner and counsel for Respondents shall submit a mental health report. The report shall

address Petitioner’s competence to assist counsel in this proceeding and evaluate the effect

of psychiatric medication on Petitioner’s ability to assist counsel.

DATED this 25th day of September, 2006.

Case 2:99-cv-02016-SMM Document 111 Filed 09/25/06 Page 3 of 3