UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 22-60184-CR-SINGHAL

LANDON KENT,

Defendant.

 /

MOTION TO RELEASE THE DEFENDANT

AND SET A REASONABLE BOND

COMES NOW the Defendant, LANDON KENT, by and through his

undersigned attorney, pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. § 4241, moves this court to order

that Mr. Kent be released from custody. In support of this motion, Mr. Kentstatesthe

following:

Statement of the Case and Facts in Support of the Motion

On August 15, 2022, a criminal complaint was filed against the defendant in

this district which alleged interstate transmission of threats in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§875(c). Mr. Kent was arrested and made his initial and removal proceedings in the

Central District of California. He was granted bond and his case was ordered

removed to this district. (DE #6) His initial here was on September 9, 2022 where he

was arraigned and ordered release on an agreed upon bond.

Prior to his initial appearance in this district, on August 24, 2022 a grand jury

returned a four-count indictment which charged alleged interstate transmission of

threats in violation of 18 U.S.C. §875(c). (DE #5)

On February 3, 2023, the defendant was arrested for various bond violations

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 1 of 7
once again in the Central District of California. Mr. Kent was ordered detained and

was once again removed to this district. Mr. Kent has been in continuous custody

ever since his arrest in California more than a year ago. (DE #34)

On April 25, 2023, the grand jury returned a superseding indictment in this

case. While the chargesremained the same, the amount of counts wasincreased from

four (4) to seven (7). (DE #48) Mr. Kent has not been arraigned on the superseding

indictment for reasons outlined below.

On the day after superseding indictment was returned, Mr. Kent’s second

attorney filed an unopposed motion to a psychiatric examination of Mr. Kent. (DE

#50) On May 1, 2023 this court entered an order granting the motion and setting a

status hearing for August 24, 2023. (DE #55)

During the time period that the defendant was being evaluated, various duty

magistrate judges held status conferences asto both the competency and arraignment

on the superseding indictment. (DE #79, 94, 99 and 115) Another status conference

is set for this Friday, March 8, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. also before the duty magistrate

judge. (DE #115)

Though the court’s order was on May 1, 2023 ordering the evaluation, it took

almost four (4) months for a report to be generated by the doctors at FDC. In her

report dated August 22, 2023, Dr. Lisa Feldman, a forensic psychologist at FDC -

Miami found that:

“Mr. Kent is actively displaying symptoms of a serious mental illness

which significantly impact his rational understanding of the legal

process. Therefore, it is recommended that the defendant be found

Incompetent to Stand Trial and that he undergo mandatory competency

restoration treatment at a more appropriate setting, such as a medical

facility.”

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 2 of 7
In light of these findings by Dr. Feldman, the court set a competency hearing

for October 20, 2023. (DE #96, 97) As a result of an agreement of the parties that

accepting the findings of the doctor at FDC - Miami and the need for the defendant

to undergo competency restoration treatment at a more appropriate setting pursuant

to 18 U.S.C. §4241(d), a proposed order was sent to chambers with language

approved by the parties prior to the competency hearing. However, the order of

commitment was notsigned by this court until December 15, 2023. (DE #103) In that

order, the defendant was committed to the custody of the Attorney General for a

period not to exceed four (4) months in order that the defendant could undergo

restoration proceedings.

Mr. Kent, who was being held at the Conte Detention Center was returned

almost immediately to FDC - Miami where he sat and sat and is still located there. 

In earlyFebruary 2024 after numerousinquiriesthe undersigned was notified that Mr.

Kent had been designated and awaiting transfer. Mr. Kent continued to sit and wait. 

The warden and the legal staff at FDC - Miami was attempted to be contacted with

negative results. Yet the days continued to pass. Even the government provided

assistance by contacting FDC - Miami as well regarding Mr. Kent’s transfer to the

appropriate facility.

On February 20, 2024, another status conference was held this time before

Magistrate Judge Jared Strauss. The court was informed of the defense’s and the

government’s effort to see that Mr. Kent received the psychiatric treatment that he

urgently needs. The government made a good faith representation that he had spoken

with FDC - Miami and was assured that Mr. Kent would be transferred by the end of

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 3 of 7
February 2024. Once again, that deadline has passed.

This motion is being filed due to continued inaction on the part of the Bureau

of Prisons. In its order (DE #103) the court committed the defendant to the custody

of the Attorney General for a “reasonable period of time, not to exceed four months,

as is necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that in the

foreseeable future, he will attain the capacity to permit proceedings to go forward.”

18 U.S.C. § 4241(d) (emphasis added). Since ten weeks has passed since the court

order with nothing but inaction from the Bureau of Prisons, there is only, at the most,

six weeks remaining in this four-month period of commitment. If the Bureau of

Prisons wants to take their sweet time in getting the defendant to his facility, the

defendant should not be forced to sit at FDC - Miami for an indeterminate amounts

of time with no therapy, continuing therapy, properly prescribed medication or a

determination that he is restorable. 

The appropriate remedy is his release with mental health treatment while at

liberty. His first visit to a mental health professional will be more treatment than he

is receiving at the present time. Mr. Kent further pledges to go to the mental health

facility so designated by the Bureau of Prisons if and when they decide to so.

Memorandum of Law

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4241 (d) provides that upon a finding of incompetence the

defendant shall be committed to the Attorney general to be hospitalized at a suitable

facility and provides that the commitment be limited to:

. . . [S]uch a reasonable period of time, not to exceed four months, as is

necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that in

the foreseeable future he will attain the capacity to permit the

proceedings to go forward; and . . . for an additional reasonable period

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 4 of 7
of time until-his mental condition is so improved that the trial may

proceed, if the court finds that there is a substantial probability that

within such additional period of time he will attain the capacity to

permit the proceedings to go forward. 

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d)(1)-(2) (emphasis added) 

In Jackson v. Indiana, the Supreme Court articulated the proper balance of the

due process interests of the defendant and the interest of the Government when it

considered a state statute that permitted the detention of an incompetent criminal

defendant indefinitely. Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715, 731 (1972) The Supreme

Court noted that a court primarily orders commitment for one of three purposes:

limiting a defendant's “dangerousnessto self,” limiting a defendant's “dangerousness

to others, and the need for care or treatment or training” to aid the defendant in

attaining competency. Id. at 737. 

Due process, the Court held, “requires that the nature and duration of

commitment bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual

is committed.” Id. at 738. (emphasis added). Therefore, if the government has

detained a defendant “solely on account of his incapacity to proceed to trial,” the

government cannot hold the defendant for “more than the reasonable period of time

necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that he will attain

that capacity in the foreseeable future.” Id. And, when a defendant “is committed

solely on account of his incapacity to proceed to trial,” his “continued commitment

must be justified by progress toward th[e] goal” of restoring his competency to stand

trial. Id. 

In response to Jackson, Congress enacted Title 18 U.S.C. § 4241. United States

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 5 of 7
v. Donofrio 896 F. 2d 1301, 1302 (11th Cir. 1990). Title 18 U.S.C. § 4241 provides

for certain deadlines to ensure the due process rights of the accused. In this case, Mr.

Kent has been committed for more than four months. There is no evidence before the

Court regarding the “substantial likelihood” that Mr. Kent will, in the foreseeable

future, be restored to competence was provided to the Court in the report by Dr. Lisa

Feldman of FDC - Miami on competency which found the defendant to be

incompetent.

Because there is no evidence before the court on which to conclude that there

is a substantial probability that within such additional period of time Mr. Kent will

attain the capacity to permit the proceedingsto go forward, the Court cannot make the

findings necessary to extend Mr. Kent’s commitment. As stated previously, Dr.

Feldman of FDC - Miami found Mr. Kent incompetent in late August 2023 and the

commitment in this Court’s December 15, 2023 order is for a period not to exceed

four months. Mr. Kent has been languishing for the past more than two and a half

months at FDC - Miami and there is less than six weeks remaining on the

aforementioned commitment. Therefore, LANDON KENT should be released on a

reasonable bond with a mental health treatment condition as well as an obligation to

report as directed for his mental health restoration proceedings. 

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 6 of 7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was

electronically filed with the Clerk of Court by using the CM/ECF system which will

send a notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record this 3

rd

day of March 2024.

Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICES OF PHILIP R. HOROWITZ

Attorney for Defendant KENT

7700 North Kendall Drive

Suite #604

Miami, Florida 33156

Tel.: (305) 670-1915

E-Mail: HorowitzDefense@aol.com

 /s/ Philip R. Horowitz 

By: PHILIP R. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE

Florida Bar No.: 466557

Case 0:22-cr-60184-JB Document 116 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/03/2024 Page 7 of 7