1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

BEAUMONT DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

JAMES RICHARD ROLLINS

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NUMBER 1:23-CR-00125-MAC

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON

THE DEFENDANT’S COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the Local Rules for the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Texas, this criminal proceeding is before the undersigned United 

States magistrate judge.

On February 1, 2024, the Defendant’s counsel filed a motion seeking a psychiatric or 

psychological exam to determine if the Defendant was suffering from a mental disease or defect 

rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent he is unable to understand the nature and 

consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense. The court 

granted that motion on February 1, 2024. (Doc. No. 19, 20.) The Defendant was subsequently 

evaluated by Lacie L. Biber, Psy.D., Licensed Psychologist at the Federal Correctional 

Institution in Fort Worth and found competent. 

Dr. Biber’s psychiatric report concludes that the Defendant “does not appear to suffer 

from a mental disease or defect rendering him unable to understand the nature and consequences 

of the proceedings against him or to properly assist in his defense.” (Doc. No. 27.)

Case 1:23-cr-00125-MAC-ZJH Document 28 Filed 08/01/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:

71
2

A competency hearing was conducted on July 31, 2024. At the hearing, the Defendant 

appeared in court with his counsel, Gary Bonneaux. Neither the Government nor the defense

objected to the psychological report’s results and findings. 

The undersigned concludes that the Defendant is able to understand the nature and 

consequences of the proceedings against him and to assist properly in his defense. The 

Defendant has a rational and factual understanding of the proceeding against him, and has 

sufficient present ability to consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of rational 

understanding. 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d); see also Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960)

RECOMMENDATION

The court should find the Defendant competent to stand trial because he understands the 

nature and consequences of the proceeding against him and is able to assist in his defense. See

18 U.S.C. § 4241. It is further recommended that the speedy trial time be excluded from 

February 1, 2024 (the date the Defendant filed an Unopposed Motion for Psychiatric Exam), 

until the date on which the District Judge signs the order adopting this report and 

recommendation.

OBJECTIONS

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), each party to this action has the right to file 

objections to this Report and Recommendation. Objections to this Report must (1) be in writing, 

(2) specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which the party objects, (3) be 

served and filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report, and (4) 

be no more than eight (8) pages in length. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); FED. R. CRIM. P.

59(b)(2); E.D. TEX. CRIM. R. CR-59(c). A party who objects to this Report is entitled to a de 

novo determination by the United States District Judge of those proposed findings and 

Case 1:23-cr-00125-MAC-ZJH Document 28 Filed 08/01/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:

72
3

recommendations to which a specific objection is timely made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); FED.

R. CRIM. P. 59(b)(3).

A party’s failure to file specific, written objections to the proposed findings of fact and 

conclusions of law contained in this report, within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy 

of this report, bars that party from: (1) entitlement to de novo review by the United States District 

Judge of the findings of fact and conclusions of law, see Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 275, 

276–77 (5th Cir. 1988), and (2) appellate review, except on grounds of plain error, of any such 

findings of fact and conclusions of law accepted by the United States District Judge, see 

Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, at 1428–29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

_________________________

Zack Hawthorn

United States Magistrate Judge SIGNED this 1st day of August, 2024.

Case 1:23-cr-00125-MAC-ZJH Document 28 Filed 08/01/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:

73