## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L APP EALS

OF TEX AS

N O

. A P

- 7 6

, 5 8 0

A L B E R T J A M E S T U R N E R

, A p p e l l a n t

v

.

T H E S T A T E O F T E X A S

O N D I R E C T A P P E A L F R O M C A U S E N O

. 1 0

- D C R

- 0 5 4 2 3 3

I N T H E 2 6 8 D I S T R I C T C O U R T

T H

F O R T B E N D C O U N T Y

P R IC E

, J

. , d e l i v e r e d t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t i n w h i c h W O M A C K

, J O H N S O N

,

C O C H R A N

, a n d A L C A L A

, J J

. , j o i n e d

. K E L L E R

, P

. J

. , f i l e d a d i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n i n w h i c h

M E Y E R S

, K E A S L E R

, a n d H E R V E Y

, J J

. , j o i n e d

.

O P I N I O N

T h e a p p e l l a n t w a s c o n v i c t e d o f t h e i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r o f m o r e t h a n o n e p e r s o n d u r i n g

t h e s a m e c r i m i n a l t r a n s a c t i o n

, n a m e l y

, h i s w i f e a n d h i s m o t h e r

- i n

- l a w

, w h i c h i s a c a p i t a l

o f f e n s e

. T h e j u r y a n s w e r e d t h e s t a t u t o r y s p e c i a l i s s u e s i n s u c h a w a y t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t w a s 1

1

T E X

. P E N A L C O D E § 19.03(a) (7)( A).Turner — 2

r e q u i r e d t o a s s e s s t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y

. D i r e c t a p p e a l i s a u t o m a t i c i n t h i s C o u r t

. 2 3

T h e a p p e l l a n t d o e s n o t c h a l l e n g e t h e s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t e i t h e r h i s

c o n v i c t i o n o r d e a t h s e n t e n c e

. I n f o u r t e e n o f h i s t w e n t y

- f

o u r p o i n t s o f e r r o r

, h e c l a i m s t h a t

h e w a s i n c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

, o r t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t s h o u l d a t l e a s t h a v e p a u s e d t h e

p r o c e e d i n g s a t v a r i o u s s t a g e s o f t r i a l t o c o n d u c t a f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g

, a s h i s t r i a l

c o u n s e l r e p e a t e d l y r e q u e s t e d

. I n o r d e r t o a d d r e s s t h e s e v a r i o u s p o i n t s o f e r r o r a d e q u a t e l y

, 4

w e m u s t u n d e r t a k e a d e t a i l e d r e c i t a t i o n o f c e r t a i n e v e n t s t r a n s p i r i n g b e f o r e a n d d u r i n g t r i a l

.

C O M P E T E N C Y T O S T A N D T R I A L

T h e e v i d e n c e a t t r i a l s h o w e d t h a t

, j u s t a f t e r m i d n i g h t o n D e c e m b e r 2 7

, 2 0 0 9

, t h e

a p p e l l a n t e n t e r e d t h e h o m e o f h i s i n

- l a w s a n d k i l l e d h i s w i f e

, K e i t h a T u r n e r

, a n d h i s m o t h e r

i n

- l a w

, B e t t y J o F r a n k

, c u t t i n g t h e i r t h r o a t s w h i l e h i s t h r e e y o u n g c h i l d r e n w e r e p r e s e n t i n

t h e h o u s e

. A l t h o u g h w e f i n d n o i n d i c t m e n t i n t h e c l e r k ’ s r e c o r d

, t h e d o c k e t s h e e t i n d i c a t e s 5

t h a t o n M a r c h 3

, 2 0 1 0

, R a l p h G o n z a l e z w a s a p p o i n t e d t o r e p r e s e n t t h e a p p e l l a n t

, t h a t a g r a n d

j u r y i n d i c t e d t h e a p p e l l a n t f o r c a p i t a l m u r d e r o n A p r i l 5

, 2 0 1 0

, a n d t h a t

, o n M a y 1 7

, 2 0 1 0

,

2

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . art. 37.071, §§ 2(b) & 2( e)( 1).

3

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . art. 37.071, § 2(h)

.

4

I n his ninth point of err or, the appellant specific ally arg ues that we should rema nd the cause

for a retrospe ctive compe tency hear ing. A

ppellant’s B rief at 29-31.

5

There is no evidenc e that the home was broken into, and the appellant was not char g ed with

committing murder in the course of a burg lary

, another theory of capital murder. T E X

. P E N A L C O D E

§ 19.03(a) (2).Turner — 3

G o n z a l e z f

i l e d a m o t i o n t o h a v e t h e a p p e l l a n t e v a l u a t e d f o r h i s c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l

.

T h e t r i a l c o u r t i m m e d i a t e l y g r a n t e d t h a t m o t i o n

, a n d t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s p r o m p t l y e v a l u a t e d

b y t w o f o r e n s i c m e n t a l

- h e a l t h e x p e r t s : p s y c h o l o g i s t D r

. K a r e n G o l l a h e r a n d p s y c h i a t r i s t D r

.

D a v i d A x e l r a d

.

I

. T h e F a c t s

A

. T h e I n i t i a l C o m p e t e n c y R e p o r t s

D r

. G o l l a h e r c o n d u c t e d t h e f i r s t e v a l u a t i o n o n M a y 1 8 a n d 1 9

, 2 0 1 0

. I n h e r r e p o r t

, t h t h

G o l l a h e r n o t e s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t “ r e p o r t e d t h e b e l i e f t h a t h i s w i f e h a d b e e n h a v i n g a n a f f a i r

f o r m a n y y e a r s w i t h t h e M a y o r o f K e n d l e t o n

, T e x a s [

, ] ” b u t t h a t “ s h e h a d r e p e a t e d l y d e n i e d

a n y e x t r a m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p

, c a l l i n g h i m p a r a n o i d

. ” G o l l a h e r a l s o n o t e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s

r e c e n t j a i l r e c o r d s “ a p p e a r t o r e f e r t o p o s s i b l e d e l u s i o n a l t h i n k i n g [

. ] ” W h i l e t h e a p p e l l a n t

d e n i e d a n y s u c h d e l u s i o n a l t h i n k i n g d u r i n g t h e e v a l u a t i o n

, G o l l a h e r n e v e r t h e l e s s n o t e d

“ s e v e r a l s t a t e m e n t s ” t h a t h e m a d e t o h e r “ t h a t r a i s e [ d ] t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f p a r a n o i d t h i n k i n g

. ”

M o r e o v e r

, “ h e r e p o r t e d t h e j a i l p s y c h i a t r i s t p r e s c r i b e d h i m R i s p e r d a l b u t h e h a s n o t t a k e n h i s

m e d i c a t i o n s b e c a u s e h e d o e s n o t b e l i e v e h e n e e d s i t

. ” G o l l a h e r d i d n o t d i a g n o s e t h e 6

a p p e l l a n t a s s u f

f e r i n g f r o m a n y p a r t i c u l a r t h o u g h t d i s o r d e r

. S h e d i d n o t b e l i e v e h i s p o s s i b l e

p a r a n o i d t h o u g h t s w o u l d “ u n d e r m i n e h i s a b i l i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e c o u r t p r o c e d u r e s

. ” S h e

a l s o c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s “ c a p a b l e o f c o m m u n i c a t i n g e v e n t s i n a n

6

Acc ording to the 2010 edition of the Phy sicians’ Desk Refer ence

, Risperdal is an “aty pical

antipsy chotic” presc ribed for the trea tment of schizophreni a a n d b ip o la r d is o r d e r

. P H Y S IC IA N S ’ D E S K

R E F E R E N C E 2682 (64 ed. 2010). t hTurner — 4

u n d e r s t a n d a b l e m a n n e r a n d c a n r e p o r t h i s s t a t e o f m i n d

. ” I t w a s h e r u l t i m a t e p r o f e s s i o n a l

o p i n i o n t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s

, a s o f t h a t t i m e

, c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

.

D r

. A x e l r a d e v a l u a t e d t h e a p p e l l a n t a m o n t h l a t e r

, o n J u n e 1 4

, 2 0 1 0

, a l s o u l t i m a t e l y

c o n c l u d i n g t h a t h e w a s c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

. I n h i s r e p o r t

, h o w e v e r

, A x e l r a d 7

a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t “ i s a n i n d i v i d u a l w h o m a y h a v e a m e n t a l i l l n e s s a n d t h e

d i a g n o s i s m a y b e a p a r a n o i d d i s o r d e r

. ” A l t h o u g h h e d i d n o t n o t e a n y i m p a i r m e n t i n t h e

a p p e l l a n t ’ s t h o u g h t p r o c e s s o r c o n t e n t

, h e n e v e r t h e l e s s f o u n d t h e a p p e l l a n t t o b e “ m i l d l y

i m p a i r e d ” i n h i s a b i l i t i e s : 1 ) t o d i s c l o s e t o c o u n s e l p e r t i n e n t f a c t s

, e v e n t s

, a n d s t a t e s o f m i n d ;

2 ) t o e n g a g e i n a r e a s o n e d c h o i c e o f l e g a l s t r a t e g i e s a n d o p t i o n s ; a n d 3 ) t o e n g a g e w i t h

c o u n s e l

. F r o m t h e r e c e n t j a i l r e c o r d s

, A x e l r a d n o t e d t h a t t h e a t t e n d i n g p s y c h i a t r i s t h a d f o u n d

t h e a p p e l l a n t t o b e “ e x h i b i t i n g s o m e p a r a n o i d i d e a t i o n

, a n d h e d o e s a p p e a r t o b e d e l u s i o n a l

. ”

T h e a p p e l l a n t a l s o e x h i b i t e d “ s o m e p a r a n o i d i d e a s ” a n d “ m i l d p a r a n o i d f u n c t i o n i n g ” d u r i n g

A x e l r a d ’ s e v a l u a t i o n

. T h e a p p e l l a n t r e p o r t e d t o A x e l r a d t h a t h e h a d “ l o s t c o n f i d e n c e i n h i s

a t t o r n e y

, a n d [ h e d i d ] a p p e a r t o h a v e s i g n i f i c a n t p r o b l e m s i n h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h i s c u r r e n t

a t t o r n e y

, M r

. G o n z a l e z

. ” T h e a p p e l l a n t w o u l d n o t d i s c u s s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e o f f e n s e

w i t h A x e l r a d ; c o n s e q u e n t l y

, A x e l r a d w a s “ u n a b l e t o a d d r e s s

, a t t h i s t i m e

, a s t o w h e t h e r [ t h e

a p p e l l a n t ] h a d a p a r a n o i d d i s o r d e r

. I n t h e e v e n t h e h a s a p a r a n o i d d i s o r d e r

, t h i s m a y b e

7

Axelrad’s repor

t was submitt ed on the form approve d by the Texas Correc tional Offic e on

Offe nders with Medica l or Mental I mpairments under Section 614.0032(b) of the Texas Hea lth and

Safety Code. T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art. 46B.025( d); T E X

. H E A L T H & S A F E T Y C O D E §

614.0032(b).Turner — 5

c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e p r o b l e m s h e i s e x p e r i e n c i n g w i t h h i s a t t o r n e y

. ” W i t h t h i s c a v e a t

, A x e l r a d

c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s n o n e t h e l e s s c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

— a n d e v e n t h a t h e w a s

c o m p e t e n t “ t o e n t e r i n t o p l e a n e g o t i a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g h i s a l l e g e d o f f e n s e i n t h e e v e n t t h a t

h e a n d h i s a t t o r n e y c a n d e v e l o p a n e f f e c t i v e w o r k i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p

. ”

B

. P r e t r i a l P r o c e e d i n g s

T h e f i r s t p r e t r i a l h e a r i n g o n r e c o r d w a s a n e x p a r t e c o n f e r e n c e t h a t t o o k p l a c e i n

c h a m b e r s o n J u n e 2 3

, 2 0 1 0

. B y t h i s t i m e t h e t r i a l c o u r t h a d a p p o i n t e d a s e c o n d a t t o r n e y

, P a t

M c C a n n

. G o n z a l e z r e p o r t e d t o t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h a t

, w h i l e h e h a d n o t y e t s e e n t h e e x p e r t s ’

c o m p e t e n c y r e p o r t s

, h e h a d b e e n t o l d t h a t G o l l a h e r d e e m e d t h e a p p e l l a n t c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d

t r i a l a n d t h a t A x e l r a d h a d f o u n d h i m t o b e “ p e r f

e c t l y f i t

. ” E v e n s o

, G o n z a l e z i n f o r m e d t h e

t r i a l c o u r t t h a t “ [ w ] e ’ r e h a v i n g d i f f i c u l t y w i t h [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ] a c c e p t i n g a l o t o f t h i n g s t h a t

h a p p e n e d

. A n d o n e o f t h e b i g g e s t t h i n g s i s h i s f a m i l y

, h i s c h i l d r e n

. T h e r e i s a l i t t l e b i t o f

d i s c o n n e c t r i g h t n o w

. ” N e v e r t h e l e s s

, t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c o u n s e l d i d n o t r e q u e s t a n y f u r t h e r

p r o c e e d i n g s a t t h i s t i m e w i t h r e s p e c t t o h i s c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l

.

M o r e t h a n f

o u r m o n t h s l a t e r

, o n N o v e m b e r 9

, 2 0 1 0

, c o u n s e l f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t f

i l e d a

n o t i c e o f i n t e n t t o t a k e t h e d e p o s i t i o n s o f t w o o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c h i l d r e n

. O n N o v e m b e r 2 2

,

2 0 1 0

, i n o p e n c o u r t

, a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a h e a r i n g o n p r e t r i a l m o t i o n s

, t h e a p p e l l a n t

p e r s o n a l l y i n f

o r m e d t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h a t h e h a d f i l e d a g r i e v a n c e a g a i n s t h i s l a w y e r s a n d

w a n t e d a n e w “ d e f

e n s e t e a m ” a p p o i n t e d

. H e c o m p l a i n e d t h a t h e d i d n o t w i s h t o h a v e h i s

c h i l d r e n d e p o s e d a n d t h a t h i s l a w y e r s h a d n o t e x p l a i n e d t o h i m t h e p u r p o s e b e h i n d t h eTurner — 6

v a r i o u s p r e t r i a l m o t i o n s o n f i l e

. D e f e n s e c o u n s e l d e n i e d t h a t t h e y h a d f a i l e d t o e x p l a i n t h e

m o t i o n s a n d a s s e r t e d t h a t t h e y n e e d e d t o d e p o s e t h e c h i l d r e n t o o b t a i n d i s c o v e r y a n d f o r

o t h e r u n d i s c l o s e d p u r p o s e s i n t h e s e r v i c e o f t h e i r c l i e n t ’ s b e s t i n t e r e s t s

. T h e t r i a l c o u r t

d e n i e d t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s r e q u e s t f o r n e w l a w y e r s

.

A n o t h e r e x p a r t e c o n f

e r e n c e o c c u r r e d i n c h a m b e r s o n D e c e m b e r 1 0

, 2 0 1 0

, t h e s a m e 8

d a y t h a t t h e d e p o s i t i o n o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c h i l d r e n w a s o r i g i n a l l y s c h e d u l e d

. T h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s

c o u n s e l r e v e a l e d t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e a p p e l l a n t a n d G o n z a l e z h a d d e t e r i o r a t e d

t o t h e p o i n t t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d p h y s i c a l l y t h r e a t e n e d G o n z a l e z

. G o n z a l e z r e l a t e d :

I n m y t h i r t y y e a r s

, I ’ v e b e e n t h r e a t e n e d o n s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s b u t n e v e r a s

a d a m a n t l y a n d n e v e r [ a s ] m e n a c i n g l y a s t h i s g u y

. I b e l i e v e t h a t n o m a t t e r w h a t

I t e l l h i m

, i f I c o u l d t e l l h i m t h a t h e w o u l d b e g e t t i n g o u t o f j a i l t o m o r r o w a n d

n o t h i n g w o u l d h a p p e n t o h i m

, h e w o u l d n o t b e l i e v e m e

. T h e r e i s n o t h i n g t h a t

I c a n d o t o c o n v i n c e t h a t m a n t h a t I h a v e a n y t h i n g o f b e n e f i t t o d o f o r h i m o r

t h a t I c a n d o f

o r h i m

.

B e c a u s e t h e a t t o r n e y / c l i e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p h a d b e c o m e s o “ u n t e n a b l e

, ” G o n z a l e z f i l e d a m o t i o n

t o w i t h d r a w

. T h a t s a m e d a y

, i n o p e n c o u r t

, t h e a p p e l l a n t p e r s o n a l l y r e i t e r a t e d t h a t h e w a s

“ o p p o s e d t o t h e d e p o s i t i o n s ” o f h i s c h i l d r e n a n d d i d n o t “ w a n t M r

. G o n z a l e z o n m y c a s e

. ”

T h e t r i a l c o u r t g r a n t e d G o n z a l e z ’ s m o t i o n t o w i t h d r a w

. B e c a u s e G o n z a l e z h a d b e e n t h e

m e m b e r o f t h e d e f

e n s e t e a m w h o h a d p r e p a r e d t o c o n d u c t t h e d e p o s i t i o n s

, t h e y w e r e

r e s c h e d u l e d

. O n D e c e m b e r 1 4

, 2 0 1 0

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t a p p o i n t e d T y r o n e M o n c r i f f e t o r e p l a c e

8

Be cause the presiding judge for the 268 J udicial District Court was out sick on Dec ember t h

10, 2010, both this ex parte confe renc e in chambe rs and the hear ing that occur red in open court later

that same da

y wer e pre sided over by

the judg e of the 434 J udicial District Court. t hTurner — 7

G o n z a l e z a n d

, o n J a n u a r y 5

, 2 0 1 1

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t g r a n t e d t h e d e f e n s e a t r i a l c o n t i n u a n c e u n t i l

A p r i l 1 8

, 2 0 1 1

, w i t h f

i n a l p r e t r i a l m o t i o n s t o b e h e a r d o n A p r i l 1 1

, 2 0 1 1

, i n o r d e r t o g i v e

M o n c r i f f e s u f f i c i e n t t i m e t o f

a m i l i a r i z e h i m s e l f w i t h t h e c a s e

.

T h e A p r i l 1 1 h e a r i n g b e g a n w i t h a r e n e w a l o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s e f f o r t s t o r e p l a c e h i s t h

t r i a l c o u n s e l

. T h e t r i a l c o u r t h a d r e c e i v e d “ l e t t e r s ” b y f a x f r o m a w o m a n p u r p o r t i n g t o b e t h e

a p p e l l a n t ’ s s i s t e r t h a t a s k e d t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o “ f i r e [ ] ” t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s t r i a l c o u n s e l

. B e c a u s e

t h e f a x e d c o p i e s o f t h e l e t t e r s d i d n o t b e a r h i s s i g n a t u r e

, h o w e v e r

, t h e a p p e l l a n t r e f u s e d t o

“ e n d o r s e ” t h e m a s h i s

. T h e t r i a l c o u r t t h e r e f o r e d e c l i n e d t o “ t a k e t h e m u p [

. ] ” M c C a n n t o l d

t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h a t “ w e a r e d o i n g e v e r y t h i n g p o s s i b l e t o p r e p a r e f o r t h i s t r i a l ; b u t [ t h e

a p p e l l a n t ] h a s n o t a g r e e d t o s p e a k w i t h u s o n m a n y o c c a s i o n s [

. ] ”

L a t e r d u r i n g t h e s a m e p r e t r i a l h e a r i n g

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t r e t u r n e d t o t h e i s s u e o f t h e

a p p e l l a n t ’ s d i s p l e a s u r e w i t h h i s t r i a l c o u n s e l

, d i r e c t l y a s k i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t w h e t h e r h e w i s h e d

t o r e p r e s e n t h i m s e l f

. T h e a p p e l l a n t u n e q u i v o c a l l y r e s p o n d e d

, “ N o

. ” H e c o m p l a i n e d

,

h o w e v e r

, t h a t t r i a l c o u n s e l “ h a v e n o t s h o w n m e a n y e v i d e n c e

. ” H e a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t t h e y

h a d p l a y e d f

o r h i m a r e c o r d i n g o f t h e 9 1 1 c a l l i n w h i c h h i s d a u g h t e r h a d r e p o r t e d t h e

m u r d e r s

, b u t h e c o m p l a i n e d t h a t h e h a d n o t b e e n a b l e t o h e a r i t

. M c C a n n a n s w e r e d t h a t t h e

a p p e l l a n t h a d b e e n p r o v i d e d e v e r y t h i n g e x c e p t f o r t h e a c t u a l p h y s i c a l e v i d e n c e

, i n c l u d i n g

o f f e n s e a n d a u t o p s y r e p o r t s

, a n d t h a t

, n o t o n l y h a d t h e a p p e l l a n t b e e n a b l e t o h e a r t h e 9 1 1

r e c o r d i n g

, i t h a d m a d e h i m w e e p

. M c C a n n a g r e e d t o m a k e a l l t h e e v i d e n c e a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e

a p p e l l a n t a g a i n

. T h e a p p e l l a n t t h e n c o m p l a i n e d t h a t h i s l a w y e r s h a d n o t c o n t a c t e d t h e M a y o rTurner — 8

o f K e n d l e t o n o r c o n d u c t e d a n y p a t e r n i t y t e s t i n g t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e M a y o r w a s t h e r e a l

f a t h e r o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s y o u n g e s t c h i l d

. M c C a n n e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e y h a d i n f a c t i n t e r v i e w e d

t h e M a y o r b u t t h a t t h e r e s u l t o f a n y p a t e r n i t y t e s t i n g w a s

, i n a n y e v e n t

, “ s a d l y n o t l e g a l l y

r e l e v a n t

. ” T h e t r i a l c o u r t i n f o r m e d t h e a p p e l l a n t t h a t i t w o u l d n o t r e m o v e t r i a l c o u n s e l f r o m

t h e c a s e a n d s u g g e s t e d t h a t h e “ s t a r t c o o p e r a t i n g w i t h t h e m

. ”

L a t e r t h a t s a m e d a y

, a n o t h e r e x p a r t e c o n f e r e n c e t o o k p l a c e i n c h a m b e r s

. M c C a n n

i n f o r m e d t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h a t “ w e ’ r e g o i n g t o a t t e m p t t o g o s p e a k w i t h h i m ; b u t a t s o m e p o i n t

,

b a s e d u p o n h i s c l e a r p a r a n o i a t h a t s o m e h o w I a n d t h e r e s t o f t h e D e f e n s e t e a m a r e w o r k i n g

w i t h t h e S t a t e t o e n s u r e h i s c o n v i c t i o n

, w e m a y n e e d t o r e v i s i t c o m p e t e n c y a t s o m e p o i n t w i t h

y o u

. ” T h e t r i a l c o u r t r e s p o n d e d t h a t “ w e c a n d o a c o m p e t e n c y e x a m w h i l e w e a r e d o i n g t h e

v o i r d i r e

. ”

C

. V o i r D i r e

V o i r d i r e w a s s e t t o c o m m e n c e t h e n e x t w e e k

, o n A p r i l 1 8

, 2 0 1 1

. I n t h e i n t e r i m

,

M c C a n n f

i l e d a “ M o t i o n f

o r a C o n t e s t e d C o m p e t e n c y H e a r i n g

. ” A t t a c h e d t o t h i s m o t i o n

w e r e a n a f

f i d a v i t f r o m M o n c r i f

f e

, d a t e d A p r i l 7

, 2 0 1 1

, a n d a c o m p e t e n c y e v a l u a t i o n f r o m

a n e u r o p s y c h o l o g i s t

, D r

. S h a w a n d a W i l l i a m s

- A n d e r s o n

, d a t e d A p r i l 1 2

, 2 0 1 1

. M o n c r i f f e

e x p l a i n e d t h a t i t w a s p a r t o f t h e d e f e n s i v e s t r a t e g y t o d e p o s e t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c h i l d r e n a n d t h e n

a g r e e f o r t h e S t a t e t o u s e t h e d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y i n l i e u o f l i v e t e s t i m o n y a t t r i a l

, s i n c e

, i n

t h e i r e s t i m a t i o n

, “ t h e i m p a c t o f [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s ] c h i l d r e n d e s c r i b i n g t h e i r m o t h e r a n d

g r a n d m o t h e r ’ s h o r r i b l e [ d e a t h s ] w a s m u c h m o r e d a m a g i n g l i v e t h a n b y d e p o s i t i o n

. ”Turner — 9

A c c o r d i n g l y

, M c C a n n h a d c o n d u c t e d t h e d e p o s i t i o n s o n A p r i l 1

, 2 0 1 1

, w h i l e M o n c r i f f e a n d

t h e a p p e l l a n t w a t c h e d b y v i d e o l i n k f r o m a n a d

j o i n i n g r o o m

. T h e a p p e l l a n t w a t c h e d w i t h “ a

b e w i l d e r e d l o o k o n h i s f a c e

. ” A f t e r w a r d s

, h e y e l l e d a t h i s l a w y e r s

, a c c u s i n g t h e m o f m a k i n g

h i s c h i l d r e n t e s t i f

y a g a i n s t h i m

, i n c o n s p i r a c y w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y

. “ H e c a n n o t a s s i s t

h i s d e f e n s e t e a m

, ” M o n c r i f

f e c o n c l u d e d

, “ n o r d o e s h e h a v e a r a t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e

m a g n i t u d e o f t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s

. H e s e e m s t o h a v e o n e t r a i n o f t h o u g h t a n d h e d i s r e g a r d s

a l l o t h e r r a t i o n a l t h o u g h t s c o m p l e t e l y

. ” D r

. W i l l i a m s

- A n d e r s o n e v a l u a t e d t h e a p p e l l a n t o n

A p r i l 1 2

, 2 0 1 1

. S h e c o n c l u d e d t h a t

, “ [ b ] e c a u s e o f t h e s e r i o u s n e s s o f [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s ]

c h a r g e s

, h i s u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n h i s d e f e n s e

, a n d h i s e x t r e m e d i s t r u s t o f e v e r y

m e m b e r o f h i s t e a m

, h i s c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l i s q u e s t i o n a b l e

. ”

A t a h e a r i n g o n t h e m o t i o n f o r a f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g

, w h i c h c o n v e n e d o n A p r i l

1 8

, t h e f i r s t d a y o f v o i r d i r e

, M c C a n n a r g u e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s “ p a r a n o i a h a s g r o w n t o t h e t h

l e v e l o f d e l u s i o n s [

. ] ” “ I t ’ s b e c o m e a n i s s u e t o t h e p o i n t w h e r e [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ] a c t i v e l y

a p p e a r s t o b e l i e v e t h a t w e a r e w o r k i n g a g a i n s t h i s o w n i n t e r e s t s

, a n d t h e d e l u s i o n s e e m s

c o m p l e t e a n d f

u l l

- b l o w n

. ” M c C a n n e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s

a t t i t u d e h a s g o t t e n w o r s e i n t h e l a s t s e v e r a l w e e k s

, t h a t w e h a v e s p e n t

n u m e r o u s h o u r s w i t h [ h i m ] o v e r t h e l a s t s e v e r a l d a y s s i n c e t h e h e a r i n g o n t h e

1 1 ; a n d w e h a v e a l l c o m e t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t a t t h i s p o i n t h e i s

- - a l t h o u g h t h

h e i n t e r a c t s w i t h u s o n t h i s p l a n e o f r e a l i t y

, h e f r a n k l y i s t h i n k i n g a n d l i v i n g

i n a n o t h e r o n e t h a t d o e s n o t a p p e a r t o c o m p o r t w i t h e i t h e r t h e e v i d e n c e w e ’ v e

s h o w n h i m

, o u r v i e w s o f t h e c a s e

, o r a n y t h i n g t h a t w e c a n d e t e r m i n e a s a

g r o u p a s r a t i o n a l

.

R e s p o n d i n g t o t h e p r o s e c u t o r ’ s a r g u m e n t t h a t s i m p l e d i s a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n a l a w y e r a n d h i sTurner — 10

c l i e n t d o e s n o t r a i s e a n i s s u e o f c o m p e t e n c y

, a n d t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s r e q u e s t t h a t M c C a n n “ f o c u s

o n t h e f a c t t h a t w e ’ v e a l r e a d y c o n d u c t e d t h e c o m p e t e n c y e v a l u a t i o n i n t h i s c a s e [

, ] ” M c C a n n

a s s e r t e d :

I h a v e d e f

e n d e d s e r i a l k i l l e r s a n d p e o p l e w h o h a v e k i l l e d t h e i r w h o l e f a m i l i e s

,

a n d t h i s c a s e i s c h a l l e n g i n g e v e n m y a b i l i t y t o

. . . s e e h o w t h i s c o u l d n o t b e

o r i g i n a t i n g f

r o m a n y t h i n g b u t m e n t a l i l l n e s s

. * * * I t h a s n o w g o t t e n t o a

p l a c e

. . . w h e r e [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s ] v e r s i o n o f t h e r e a l i t y o f t h e f a c t s t h a t h e d e a l s

w i t h d a y

- t o

- d a y

, w h a t e v e r e v i d e n c e i s s h o w n

, w h a t e v e r d i s c u s s i o n s w e h a v e

,

c o m e s f r o m a p l a c e o f

s u c h d e e p r o o t e d p a r a n o i a t h a t I c a n n o l o n g e r b e l i e v e

i t i s s i m p l y a d i f

f i c u l t p e r s o n t h a t I ’ m d e a l i n g w i t h

.

G i v e n t h e c o m p e t e n c y e v a l u a t i o n s t h a t h a d a l r e a d y b e e n c o n d u c t e d b y D r s

. G o l l a h e r a n d

A x e l r a d

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t f o u n d t h a t w h a t D r

. W i l l i a m s

- A n d e r s o n c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s t h e

a p p e l l a n t ’ s s i m p l e “ u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n h i s d e f e n s e ” p r o v i d e d i n s u f

f i c i e n t g r o u n d s

t o c o n d u c t a c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g

, a n d i t t h e r e f o r e d e n i e d t h e m o t i o n

.

M c C a n n b r o a c h e d t h e s u b j e c t o f c o m p e t e n c y a g a i n a b o u t a w e e k i n t o v o i r d i r e w h e n

,

o n A p r i l 2 6

, 2 0 1 1

, h e c o m p l a i n e d t h a t

, “ a l t h o u g h I h a v e a t t e m p t e d t o e n g a g e w i t h m y c l i e n t

i n r e g a r d s t o h i s o p i n i o n s

, f o r w h a t e v e r r e a s o n

, i t a p p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n s h u t d o w n

. ” H e u r g e d

t h e t r i a l c o u r t t a k e u p h i s m o t i o n f o r a c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g a g a i n

. T h e t r i a l c o u r t a d v i s e d h i m

t o f i l e a n e w m o t i o n w i t h a c c o m p a n y i n g a f f i d a v i t

. M c C a n n a p p a r e n t l y d i d

, b e c a u s e a 9

r e n e w e d h e a r i n g w a s h e l d o n A p r i l 2 7

, 2 0 1 1

. W h i l e p e r s i s t i n g i n i t s r e f u s a l t o o r d e r a f

o r m a l

c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t a t t h i s t i m e d e c i d e d “ t o d i r e c t t h e C o u r t ’ s b e h a v i o r a l

m e n t a l h e a l t h d i r e c t o r t o d o a n e v a l u a t i o n t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s ] s t a t u s h a s

9

We find no such motion or aff idavit, however , in the rec ord.Turner — 11

c h a n g e d s i n c e t h e l a s t t i m e a c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g o c c u r r e d

. ” A f t e r w a r d s

, “ I ’ l l d o a n i n i t i a l 1 0

e v a l u a t i o n a b o u t w h e t h e r [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s ] s t a t u s h a s c h a n g e d

. ” A c c o r d i n g l y

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t

o r d e r e d D r

. C o n n i e A l m e i d a

, a l i c e n s e d c l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t a n d D i r e c t o r o f t h e F o r t B e n d

C o u n t y B e h a v i o r a l H e a l t h S e r v i c e s

, t o e v a l u a t e t h e a p p e l l a n t

, w i t h a n e m p h a s i s o n w h e t h e r

h e w a s “ a b l e t o r a t i o n a l l y a s s i s t h i s l a w y e r s i n t h e d e f e n s e o f h i s c a s e

. ”

D r

. A l m e i d a f

i l e d a r e p o r t o n M a y 1 9

, 2 0 1 1

, a n d a p p e a r e d a t a h e a r i n g t h e n e x t d a y

,

o n M a y 2 0

. S h e t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w o u l d n o t c o o p e r a t e w i t h h e r s e v e r a l a t t e m p t s t h

t o e v a l u a t e h i m

, a n d t h a t t h e b e s t s h e c o u l d d o w a s t o r e p o r t h e r i m p r e s s i o n s f r o m a h a l f

- h o u r

c o n v e r s a t i o n s h e h a d m a n a g e d t o h a v e w i t h h i m o n M a y 1 7

, 2 0 1 1

, d u r i n g w h i c h “ [ h ] e d i d

e x p r e s s d i s a g r e e m e n t w i t h s o m e o f t h e s t r a t e g i e s a n d ‘ t a c t i c s ’ o f h i s d e f e n s e t e a m

. ” A s o f

t h a t d a t e

, t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s n o t t a k i n g a n y p s y c h o t r o p i c m e d i c a t i o n s

, n o r d i d t h e b e h a v i o r a l

h e a l t h s t a f

f a t t h e j a i l d e e m s u c h m e d i c a t i o n s p r e s e n t l y w a r r a n t e d

. F r o m a l l t h i s

, A l m e i d a

w a s u n a b l e t o d r a w a n y c o n c l u s i o n s a b o u t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l

. B u t s h e

b e l i e v e d t h e r e t o b e “ n o s i g n i f i c a n t c h a n g e s i n h i s f

u n c t i o n i n g ” s i n c e h e w a s i n i t i a l l y

e v a l u a t e d f

o r c o m p e t e n c y b y D r s

. G o l l a h e r a n d A x e l r a d t h e p r e v i o u s s u m m e r

. S h e c o u l d n o t

s a y “ d e f i n i t i v e l y ” t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s n o t p a r a n o i d

.

O n c r o s s

- e x a m i n a t i o n b y t h e p r o s e c u t o r

, A l m e i d a o p i n e d t h a t

, “ b a s e d o n m y l i m i t e d

i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h h i m

, I w o u l d s a y t h a t h e w o u l d h a v e a r a t i o n a l a n d f a c t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f

1 0

Other than the informal hear ing on April 18

, afte r which the trial court ruled that no formal t h

competenc y

hear ing w as nec essar

y , there had bee n no prior compe tency hear ing.Turner — 12

t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t h i m

. ” S h e a l s o a c k n o w l e d g e d a n o b s e r v a t i o n s h e h a d m a d e i n h e r 1 1

w r i t t e n r e p o r t t h a t “ t h e r e i s n o c u r r e n t e v i d e n c e t o s u b s t a n t i a t e a d e l u s i o n a l o r o t h e r

p s y c h i a t r i c d i s o r d e r

. ” N o r w a s s h e a w a r e o f “ a n y b e h a v i o r s t h a t w a r r a n t a p s y c h i a t r i c

i n t e r v e n t i o n ” s i n c e t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d b e e n j a i l e d

. S h e n e v e r t h e l e s s s t o o d b y h e r p o s i t i o n t h a t

s h e w a s u n a b l e t o r e a c h a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f h e r o w n w h e t h e r t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d a p r e s e n t

a b i l i t y t o a s s i s t h i s c o u n s e l

, a s t h e t r i a l c o u r t h a d r e q u e s t e d

. T h e b e s t s h e c o u l d s a y w a s t h a t

s h e p e r c e i v e d “ n o s i g n i f i c a n t c h a n g e s i n [ h i s ] e m o t i o n a l o r c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g s i n c e ” t h e

e a r l i e r e v a l u a t i o n s t h a t w o u l d a d v e r s e l y i m p a c t h i s c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l

.

A f t e r h e a r i n g a r g u m e n t f

r o m t h e p a r t i e s

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t d e n i e d t h e m o t i o n f o r a f o r m a l

c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g

. W h i l e a c k n o w l e d g i n g t h a t D r s

. G o l l a h e r a n d A x e l r a d h a d m a d e

“ n o t a t i o n o f p a r a n o i a ” i n t h e i r i n i t i a l c o m p e t e n c y r e p o r t s

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e y

h a d n o t f o u n d t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s p a r a n o i a t o b e “ s u f f i c i e n t t o m e e t t h e s t a t u t o r y g u i d e l i n e s ” f o r

i n c o m p e t e n c y

. T h e t r i a l c o u r t o p i n e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s e v i d e n c e o f i n c o m p e t e n c e

,

m e a s u r e d a g a i n s t t h o s e “ s t a t u t o r y g u i d e l i n e s

, ” “ d o e s n o t c a l l f o r s e c o n d a r y c o m p e t e n c y

e v a l u a t i o n s u n l e s s t h e r e ’ s a c l e a r c h a n g e i n [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s ] w h o l e a s p e c t t h a t r a i s e s a c l e a r

c o n c e r n

. ” T h e o n l y s u c h c h a n g e t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t c o u l d s e e w a s t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s “ f a i l u r e t o

c o o p e r a t e w i t h [ c o u n s e l ] a n d t h a t ’ s h i s c h o i c e t o m a k e [

. ] ” E v e n s o

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t b e l i e v e d

1 1

We note here that having a rational understanding of the proce eding s is not the same thing

as having the ability to consult with trial counsel with a rea sonable deg ree of rational understanding

or to “ra tionally assist his lawy ers in the defe nse of his case ”—the specific issue that the trial court

asked Almeida to evalua te. Unless a criminal defe ndant satisfies both criter ia, he is incompetent to

stand trial. T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . art. 46B .003(a)

.Turner — 13

t h i s h a d b e e n e n o u g h t o j u s t i f y a p p o i n t i n g A l m e i d a

, i n a n a b u n d a n c e o f c a u t i o n

, “ t o e x p l o r e

t h i s a r e a t o s e e i f t h e r e w a s s u c h a c h a n g e t h a t i t w o u l d r e q u i r e a f u l l c o m p e t e n c y h e a r i n g

. ”

A l t h o u g h A l m e i d a w a s u n a b l e t o r e a c h a c o n c l u s i o n w h e t h e r t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s f a i l u r e t o

c o o p e r a t e w i t h h i s c o u n s e l r e n d e r e d h i m i n c o m p e t e n t

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t r e a s o n e d

, h e r i n a b i l i t y

w a s i t s e l f t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c h o i c e n o t t o t a l k t o h e r a b o u t h i s c a s e

. “ T h a t i s a

r e a s o n e d d e c i s i o n o n h i s p a r t

. D o e s i t r e a c h t o t h e l e v e l o f i n c o m p e t e n c y

, t h e r e ’ s n o t h i n g t o

s h o w t o d a y t h a t i t d o e s t h a t

. ”

D

. T r i a l o n t h e M e r i t s

T r i a l o n t h e m e r i t s b e g a n o n M a y 2 5

, 2 0 1 1

. D u r i n g o p e n i n g s t a t e m e n t s

, M c C a n n

i n f o r m e d t h e j u r y t h a t t h e d e f e n s e e x p e c t e d t h e e v i d e n c e t o s h o w t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t k i l l e d h i s

w i f e i n a “ j e a l o u s r a g e

, ” b u t t h a t t h e k i l l i n g o f h i s m o t h e r

- i n

- l a w

, w i t h w h o m t h e a p p e l l a n t

h a d a l w a y s g o t t e n a l o n g

, o c c u r r i n g i n t h e c l o s e q u a r t e r s o f t h e u p s t a i r s h a l l w a y

, h a d n o t b e e n

p e r p e t r a t e d i n t e n t i o n a l l y

— t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t

, w h i l e c e r t a i n l y g u i l t y o f “ t w o t e r r i b l e h o r r i b l e

c r i m e s [

, ] ” w a s n o t g u i l t y o f a c a p i t a l o f f e n s e

. A l o n g t h e w a y

, M c C a n n e x p l a i n e d t o t h e j u r y

t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t “ d o e s n ’ t l i k e m e v e r y m u c h

. ” L a t e r

, h e o b s e r v e d : “ A n d i f y o u l o o k a t h i m

t h e r e

, h e ’ s a l a r g e m a n

, a s h e s i t s t h e r e s c o w l i n g a t m e

. B e c a u s e h e c a n ’ t a d m i t w h a t h e d i d

,

t o h i m s e l f o r a n y b o d y e l s e

. ” T h e e n s u i n g d e f e n s i v e s t r a t e g y w a s t o a c k n o w l e d g e t h a t t h e

S t a t e ’ s e v i d e n c e s h o w i n g t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e t w o m u r d e r s w a s a t l e a s t

s u b s t a n t i a l

, i f n o t o v e r w h e l m i n g

, b u t t o t r y t o e n g e n d e r a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t i n t h e j u r o r s ’

m i n d s w h e t h e r h e h a r b o r e d t h e r e q u i s i t e c u l p a b l e i n t e n t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e d e a t h o f h i sTurner — 14

m o t h e r

- i n

- l a w t o s a t i s f

y t h e s t a t u t o r y c r i t e r i a f o r a c a p i t a l o f

f e n s e

.

O n M a y 2 7

, t h e F r i d a y b e f o r e M e m o r i a l D a y

, t h e a p p e l l a n t e x e r c i s e d h i s r i g h t t o t h

t e s t i f y i n h i s o w n b e h a l f

, a g a i n s t t h e a d v i c e o f c o u n s e l

. A f t e r h a v i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t i d e n t i f y

p h o t o g r a p h s o f h i s c h i l d r e n

, w i f e

, a n d m o t h e r

- i n

- l a w

, M c C a n n s i m p l y a s k e d h i m w h e t h e r

t h e r e w a s “ s o m e t h i n g y o u w o u l d l i k e t o t e l l t h i s j u r y [

. ] ” T h e p r o s e c u t o r o b j e c t e d t h a t t h e

q u e s t i o n c a l l e d f

o r a n a r r a t i v e r e s p o n s e

. I n s t r u c t e d t o n a r r o w h i s i n q u i r y

, M c C a n n a s k e d t h e

a p p e l l a n t w h e t h e r h e h a d s o m e t h i n g t o t e l l t h e j u r y a b o u t t h e n i g h t o f t h e m u r d e r s

. A f t e r

s o m e a d d i t i o n a l w r a n g l i n g

, t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s a l l o w e d t o d e s c r i b e i n n a r r a t i v e f a s h i o n w h a t

h e h a d d o n e d u r i n g t h e d a y o f D e c e m b e r 2 6

, 2 0 0 9

, b e f o r e t h e m u r d e r s

. A s h i s n a r r a t i v e

a p p r o a c h e d t h e t i m e o f t h e m u r d e r s

, h o w e v e r

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t d i r e c t e d M c C a n n t o a s k a n o t h e r

q u e s t i o n

. A t a b e n c h c o n f e r e n c e

, M c C a n n e x p l a i n e d t h a t h e w a s e t h i c a l l y c o n s t r a i n e d f r o m

a s k i n g m o r e s p e c i f

i c q u e s t i o n s

, a n d t h e p r o s e c u t o r s p e c u l a t e d t h a t M c C a n n “ c a n ’ t d o i t

b e c a u s e h e k n o w s i t ’ s a l i e

. ” M c C a n n w a s t h e n a l l o w e d t o a s k t h e a p p e l l a n t w h e t h e r h e h a d 1 2

1 2

Trial counse l la

ter rene wed their

claim that the appe llant was incompete nt in a motion for

new trial. At a hear ing on that motion, McCann testified that, prior to tr ial, the appellant “g ave, at

one point, three differ ent versions of what had happene d the night of the killings to my self and Mr.

Moncriff e, and at no point in the conver sation, did he indicate which one he intended to testify to.”

McCann continued:

He became extremely upset with us and me, in particula r, and beg an to ask

if, y ou know, I was part of a secr et s ociety that was try ing to get h i m k i l l ed or t hat

was advanc ing my car eer by failing to defe nd him. He, at one point, whe n we wer e

sitti ng next to eac h other, asked me if Iwas putting things in his coff ee. I t -- it had

g ot to the point of absurdity in some of our conver sations. He constantly ref err ed me

to Biblical pa ssag es that appe are d to have no r eleva nce in ter ms of his defense

.

* * *Turner — 15

“ s o m e t h i n g e l s e [ h e ] w a n t e d t o a d d [

. ] ” A t t h a t p o i n t

, t h e a p p e l l a n t v e h e m e n t l y d e n i e d h a v i n g

e v e r “ p u t [ h i s ] h a n d s o n [ h i s ] w i f e [

, ] ” a n d c l a i m e d t h a t h i s d a u g h t e r h a d s a i d a s m u c h d u r i n g

a p o r t i o n o f h e r d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y “ t h a t y ’ a l l r e c o r d e d o v e r

. ” W h e n t h e p r o s e c u t o r ’ s

h e a r s a y o b

j e c t i o n w a s s u s t a i n e d

, M c C a n n a s k e d t h e a p p e l l a n t t o d e s c r i b e t h e e v e n t s a f t e r

D e c e m b e r 2 7

, a n d t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s o n c e a g a i n a l l o w e d t o n a r r a t e

. H e w a s n o t s p e c i f i c a l l y t h

a s k e d o n d i r e c t e x a m i n a t i o n a b o u t t h e k i l l i n g s t h e m s e l v e s

.

O n c r o s s

- e x a m i n a t i o n

, t h e a p p e l l a n t d e n i e d h a v i n g t h r e a t e n e d h i s f i r s t a t t o r n e y

,

G o n z a l e z

. H e c l a i m e d t h a t G o n z a l e z w i t h d r e w f r o m t h e c a s e b e c a u s e t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d t r i e d

t o p u t a s t o p t o t h e d e p o s i t i o n s o f h i s c h i l d r e n

. T h e a p p e l l a n t f u r t h e r m a i n t a i n e d t h a t h i s

c h i l d r e n w e r e c o e r c e d i n t o g i v i n g t h e d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y a g a i n s t h i m

. A t t h i s j u n c t u r e

,

M c C a n n r e n e w e d h i s m o t i o n f o r a c o m p e t e n c y e x a m i n a t i o n

, b u t t h e t r i a l c o u r t d e n i e d i t

,

o b s e r v i n g t h a t “ [ t ] h e r e ’ s n o t h i n g t h a t I h a v e b e e n s h o w n t h a t c h a n g e s a n y t h i n g t h a t I h a v e

b e e n s h o w n b e f

o r e

. ” T h e a p p e l l a n t n e x t d e n i e d t h a t h i s a t t o r n e y s w e r e “ t r y i n g t o s a v e [ h i s ]

l i f e [

. ] ” W h e n t h e p r o s e c u t o r a s k e d t h e a p p e l l a n t w h e t h e r M c C a n n h a d b e e n m i s l e a d i n g t h e

j u r y p a n e l d u r i n g h i s o p e n i n g s t a t e m e n t

, t h e f o l l o w i n g t r a n s p i r e d :

[The appellant] was obsessed with the May or o f Ke n d l eton with whom he

believed his wife had had an aff air. He was con s t an tly attempting to blame the

killings on this

-- that person, and that’s essentially what he testified to, almost as if

h e wanted it to be true. And I don’t

-- I ’m not a mental health profe ssional. I ca n

only tell y ou that I have done this for many y ear s. I have never had a client who, so

fundame ntally ref

used to acknow ledg e the daily rea lity that we wer e dealing with to

the point that it was as if he was telling y ou the sky was alway s g ree n. That

-- I have

to attribute to something other than

. . . a simple attempt to lie beca use there was no

basis for the lie. T here was not a f act to support his view of w hat was g oing on.Turner — 16

A I a s k e d h i m

, b e f

o r e h e m a d e h i s s t a t e m e n t

, w h a t

- - w h a t I w a s c u r i o u s a b o u t

w h a t e x a c t l y w a s h e g o i n g t o m a k e i n h i s o p e n i n g s t a t e m e n t

. A n d t h e r e a s o n

I s a i d t h a t

- - t h e r e a s o n I a s k e d t h a t q u e s t i o n i s b e c a u s e t h a t w e w e r e n ’ t

t a l k i n g

. T h e y w e r e n ’ t c o m i n g t o s e e m e

. T h e y d i d n ’ t w a n t t o h e a r a n y t h i n g

I h a d t o s a y a b o u t t h e t h i n g s t h a t I w a s s a y i n g a b o u t t h e m a y o r a n d a l l t h e

a l l e g a t i o n s t h a t I w a s s a y i n g

. T h e y w o u l d n ’ t i n v e s t i g a t e i t

. T h e y k e p t b r i n g i n g

m e

- - I h a v e p r o o f o f e v e r y t h i n g t h a t I ’ m s a y i n g

.

Q D o y o u k n o w t h e y t a l k e d t o t h e m a y o r ?

A T h a t ’ s w h a t t h e y t o l d m e

.

Q I k n o w

. E v e r y b o d y d i d

.

A A n d I ’ v e

, y o u k n o w

- - I l o o k e d a t t h e t h i n g

. H e w a s o b v i o u s l y l y i n g

.

Q D o y o u k n o w t h e s e t w o g e n t l e m e n h a v e t r a c k e d e v e r y t h i n g y o u h a v e e v e r

s a i d d o w n ?

A N o

.

Q A n d i t c o m e s t o o n e c o n c l u s i o n : Y o u k i l l e d t h o s e t w o w o m e n

.

A I d i d n ’ t k i l l a n y o n e

.

Q A n d t h e y ’ r e t r y i n g t o s a v e y o u r l i f e

. Y o u u n d e r s t a n d t h a t ?

A I d i d n ’ t k i l l a n y o n e

.

T h e a p p e l l a n t f

u r t h e r t e s t i f

i e d t h a t h i s d a u g h t e r h a d m a d e a m i s t a k e t o i d e n t i f y h i m a s t h e

k i l l e r

. H e e x p l a i n e d t h a t h e f l e d t h e s t a t e a f

t e r t h e k i l l i n g s b e c a u s e t h e M a y o r h a d t h r e a t e n e d

h i m a n d h a d s e n t t w o u n i d e n t i f i e d m e n t o b r e a k i n t o h i s h o u s e

. A s k e d w h e t h e r h i s l a w y e r s

w e r e p a r t o f t h i s a p p a r e n t “ c o n s p i r a c y ” a g a i n s t h i m

, t h e a p p e l l a n t r e p l i e d t h a t t h e y w e r e n o t

“ g o i n g o u t a n d g e t t i n g t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t I w a s t a l k i n g a b o u t

, a n d I w a s w o n d e r i n g w h y

. ” T h e

p r o s e c u t o r w r a p p e d u p h i s c r o s s

- e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e a p p e l l a n t b y a s k i n g h i m :Turner — 17

Q A l l r i g h t

. L e t m e a s k y o u t h i s w a y : I s t h e r e a n y w a y

, M r

. T u r n e r

, y o u w a n t

t o c h a n g e a n y o f y o u r s t o r y r i g h t n o w a n d b e g f o r f o r g i v e n e s s f

r o m t h i s j u r y

a t a l l ?

A I d i d n ’ t k i l l a n y o n e

.

Q I k n o w

. D o y o u k n o w h o w d a n g e r o u s t h a t m a k e s y o u ?

M c C a n n ’ s o b j e c t i o n w a s s u s t a i n e d

, b u t h i s m o t i o n f o r m i s t r i a l w a s d e n i e d

. O n r e d i r e c t

,

M c C a n n s i m p l y a s k e d :

Q M r

. T u r n e r

, i n y o u r m i n d

, a l l t h a t d r i v e l w a s t r u e

, w a s n ’ t i t ?

A I t i s t r u e

.

S h o r t l y a f

t e r

, t h e d e f

e n s e r e s t e d a n d b o t h s i d e s c l o s e d

.

O n T u e s d a y

, M a y 3 1

, t h e m o r n i n g t h a t f i n a l a r g u m e n t s f

o r t h e g u i l t p h a s e w e r e s e t s t

t o b e g i n

, t h e a p p e l l a n t u n e q u i v o c a l l y a n n o u n c e d t h a t h e w a s “ f i r i n g m y d e f

e n s e t e a m a n d

r e p r e s e n t i n g m y s e l f

. I s h o u l d b e a b l e t o r e p r e s e n t m y s e l f a t a n y s t a g e o f t h i s t r i a l

. I h a v e t h a t

r i g h t

. ” W h e n t h e t r i a l c o u r t a s k e d w h y

, t h e a p p e l l a n t a s s e r t e d :

1 3

T h e y h a v e s e r i o u s l y n e g l e c t e d m y c a s e

. T h e y h a v e i g n o r e d t h e

i n f o r m a t i o n I h a v e p r o v i d e d t h e m f o r m y d e f

e n s e

. W i t n e s s e s f

o r m y d e f

e n s e

h a v e n ’ t b e e n c o n t a c t e d t h a t I ’ v e g i v e n t h e m

.

H e m a d e u p

- - h e c a m e u p w i t h a n o p e n i n g s t a t e m e n t w h e n I h a d

–

s i g n e d a n a f

f i d a v i t o r e v e n t o l d h i m t h a t I

- - t h a t I k i l l e d a n y o n e

. S o w h e r e d i d

h e g e t t h i s o p e n i n g s t a t e m e n t f r o m

, t h a t i t ’ s a n a c c i d e n t ? H e h a s n o t d e f e n d e d

m e

.

1 3

I n three points of err or, the appellant arg ues that, if he wa s indeed c ompetent, then he was

denied his Six th Amendment rig ht to repr esent him self under Faretta v. C aliforni a

, 422 U.S. 806

(1975). I n view of our

dispositi on of this appea l, we nee d not presently addre ss this claim.Turner — 18

M c C a n n r e m i n d e d t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h a t h e h a d r e c e n t l y r e n e w e d h i s r e q u e s t f o r a c o m p e t e n c y

h e a r i n g b a s e d u p o n t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s p a r a n o i a

. D i r e c t e d t o r e s p o n d s p e c i f i c a l l y t o t h e

a p p e l l a n t ’ s c o m p l a i n t s

, M c C a n n r e p l i e d :

W e h a v e

, d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n

- - W i t h o u t g o i n g i n t o

t o o m u c h c l i e n t c o n f

i d e n c e

, M r

. T u r n e r h a s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e w e r e e n t o u r a g e

m e m b e r s o f t h e m a y o r o f K e n d l e t o n w h o m i g h t f i t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n a s w e l l a s

o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s w h o m h e m i g h t h a v e h i r e d w h o w a s p a r t o f h i s h a n g

- a r o u n d

c r e w

. W e h a v e f

o u n d n o s u c h i n d i v i d u a l w h o w o u l d r e f u t e t h e 1 0 0 p e r c e n t

c e r t a i n e y e w i t n e s s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f h i s o w n c h i l d r e n d u r i n g t h e i n c i d e n t

.

T H E C O U R T : M r

. T u r n e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e w a s a f

r a i d o f c e r t a i n

i n d i v i d u a l s a n d i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h a t w a s p a r t o f t h e r e a s o n w h y h e f l e d

. D i d y o u

p u r s u e t h a t i n v e s t i g a t i o n ?

M R

. M C C A N N : W e h a v e l o c a t e d n o s u c h i n d i v i d u a l s

, e i t h e r a s a

f r i e n d o f t h e m a y o r o f K e n d l e t o n n o r a n y i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e m a y o r o f

K e n d l e t o n w a s a n y w h e r e n e a r h i s h o m e o n t h e n i g h t t h a t h e m e n t i o n e d

, n o r

t h a t h e h a s a n y p r o c l i v i t y o r

, i n d e e d

, a n y r e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h i s w i f e

. T h a t

d o e s n ’ t m e a n t h a t M r

. T u r n e r d i d n ’ t t h i n k t h a t t h e r e w a s o n e

, b u t a t t h e s a m e

t i m e

, w e f

o u n d n o s u c h i n d i c a t i o n

.

T H E C O U R T : M r

. T u r n e r h a s r a i s e d t h e i s s u e t h a t y o u h a v e n o t

p u r s u e d t h e t h e o r y t h a t i t w a s a n a c c i d e n t

. W o u l d y o u r e s p o n d t o t h a t

a l l e g a t i o n ?

M R

. M C C A N N : I u n d e r s t o o d h i m t o m e a n t h a t h e r e j e c t e d t h e t h e o r y

t h a t i t w a s a n a c c i d e n t b e c a u s e h i s t e s t i m o n y i n d i c a t e d h e w a s n o t t h e r e

. T h e

o n l y p l a u s i b l e d e f

e n s e t h a t M r

. M o n c r i f

f e a n d I c o u l d s e e c o m i n g f r o m t h e

e v i d e n c e t h a t w e e x a m i n e d i s t h a t t h e s e c o n d k i l l i n g

- - w h i l e t h e f i r s t k i l l i n g

m a y h a v e b e e n a n a c t o f p a s s i o n b e t w e e n a j e a l o u s h u s b a n d a n d w i f e

, t h e

s e c o n d k i l l i n g w o u l d a p p e a r t o h a v e b e e n u n i n t e n d e d

. A t l e a s t t h e r e w a s n o

i n d i c a t i o n o f a n y q u a r r e l o r v i o l e n c e b e t w e e n M r

. T u r n e r a n d B e t t y J o

.

A n d g i v e n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d t h e p l a c e m e n t o f t h e s e c o n d f

l o o r

, i t

i s c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t h e d i d n o t i n t e n d t h a t k i l l i n g a n d t h a t k i l l i n g w a s

, i n f a c t

,

e i t h e r a c c i d e n t a l o r p e r h a p s d o n e i n a r e c k l e s s m a n n e r t h a t w o u l d h a v e

i n d i c a t e d a l e s s e r c h a r g e m i g h t b e a v a i l a b l e o r t h a t w e c o u l d a r g u e p l a u s i b l yTurner — 19

t h a t t h a t k i l l i n g w a s n o t i n t e n t i o n a l

.

B a s e d u p o n t h e s e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t s u m m a r i l y d e n i e d t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s d e m a n d

t o “ f i r e ” h i s t r i a l c o u n s e l a n d r e p r e s e n t h i m s e l f

. C l o s i n g a r g u m e n t s b e g a n s o o n a f t e r

.

T h e p r o s e c u t o r s u s e d t h e i r o p e n i n g r e m a r k s t o h i g h l i g h t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c l a i m t h a t h i s

c h i l d r e n h a d m i s t a k e n l y i d e n t i f i e d h i m a n d t o p o u n d a w a y a t h i s f a i l u r e t o t a k e

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y

. F o r h i s p a r t

, M c C a n n d e s c r i b e d t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s b e h a v i o r t h i s w a y : 1 4

1 4

The jury hear d a rec ording of the 911 call that the appellant’ s daug hter place d to repor t the

killings as they

wer e occ urring . The fir st prosecutor a rg ued:

And I know that the only person not aff ecte d by that 9-1-1 call was the m an who

cre ated it, the Def

endant. And he basica lly told y ou that when he g ot up on that

stand. He told that [hi s daug hter] had misidentified him, that may be she thought she

saw him, but that’s not who it was.

Misidentified him ? This is a 12-y ear -old g irl who’s not identify ing a

strang er; she’s not g iving just a g ener al descr iption of someone. I t’s her fathe r. She

knows who he is, and she knows what he did.

* * *

He chose to testify and tell y ou a story

, and that’s exactly what it was, a story

. But it doesn’t make sense be cause lies don’t make se nse.

The sec ond prosec utor took up the theme of the appellant’ s demea nor fr om the witness stand:

There wer e no tear s from the Def endant. And what y ou saw of him on Fr iday

, there

was no admissions by him of what he had done. There was no shame for what he had

done. “I wasn’t ther e.”

And it was def

iance . I t was def

iance with a complete lac k of ac cepta nce of

what the f

acts a re in his demea

nor fr om the witness stand.

* * *

He comes up with a story it’s the may or of Kendleton’ s fault. What does that tell y ouTurner — 20

W h e n I g o t u p a n d t a l k e d t o y o u i n o p e n i n g

, I t o l d y o u t h a t m y c l i e n t

, A l b e r t

J a m e s T u r n e r

, s t i l l h a s n ’ t a c c e p t e d w h a t h a p p e n e d b e c a u s e o n t h a t n i g h t

, h e

s n a p p e d

. Y o u a c t u a l l y g o t t o w a t c h w h a t h e t h i n k s i s t h e t r u t h b e c a u s e h e

l i t e r a l l y c a n n o t a c c e p t w h a t h a p p e n e d

. I n h i s m i n d

, v e r y s a d l y

, i t i s t h e t r u t h

.

H e t h e n w e n t o n t o u r g e t h e j u r y n e v e r t h e l e s s t o a c c e p t t h e d e f e n s i v e t h e o r y t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t

h a d n o t i n t e n d e d t o k i l l h i s m o t h e r

- i n

- l a w a n d

, o n t h a t a c c o u n t

, t o f i n d h i m n o t g u i l t y o f

c a p i t a l m u r d e r

.

T h e S t a t e a r g u e d i n r e s p o n s e t h a t t h e w o u n d i n f l i c t e d o n t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s m o t h e r

- i n

- l a w

w a s t o o s e v e r e t o j u s t i f

y a f i n d i n g t h a t i t w a s n o t i n t e n t i o n a l l y i n f l i c t e d

. A l o n g t h e w a y

, t h e

p r o s e c u t o r o n c e a g a i n e m p h a s i z e d t h e a b s u r d i t y o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s t e s t i m o n y

, r e m i n d i n g t h e

j u r y t h a t e v e n M c C a n n h a d c h a r a c t e r i z e d h i s s t o r y a s “ d r i v e l

. ” L a t e r

, d u r i n g t h e i r c l o s i n g

a r g u m e n t s a t t h e p u n i s h m e n t p h a s e o f t r i a l

, t h e S t a t e s i m i l a r l y r e l i e d u p o n t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s

i m p l a u s i b l e g u i l t

- p h a s e t e s t i m o n y t o a r g u e t h a t t h e r e m o r s e l e s s n e s s h e d i s p l a y e d i n t h e

c o u r t r o o m a n d f

r o m t h e w i t n e s s s t a n d c o n s t i t u t e d c o m p e l l i n g e v i d e n c e t h a t s h o u l d c o n v i n c e

t h e j u r y t h a t h e w o u l d c o n s t i t u t e a f u t u r e d a n g e r t o s o c i e t y

. 1 5

about his demea

nor and w hat his mindset is i n this?

1 5

Those ar g uments include the following :

And then what does he do? He g ets up on the stand and he tells y ou that he

wasn’t even there

. Wit h all the overw helming evidenc e ag ainst hi m

, h e s t i l l can’ t

admit that he did it. He g ets up on the stand and he say s, I wasn’t there

, even though

his own attorney s told y ou that he did it.

What does that say about a person? What kind of person can sit and listen to

the 9-1-1 call that y ’all hear d [t he appellant’ s daug hter] descr ibing her g randmother

and mot her dy

ing be fore her e y es and show no emotion? What kind of person can

sit there and look at autopsy photos of what he’s done, his wife and mother-in-la w’sTurner — 21

I I

. T h e L a w

A c r i m i n a l d e f

e n d a n t w h o i s i n c o m p e t e n t m a y n o t b e p u t t o t r i a l w i t h o u t v i o l a t i n g d u e

p r o c e s s

. “ I t h a s l o n g b e e n a c c e p t e d t h a t a p e r s o n w h o s e m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n i s s u c h t h a t h e

1 6

l a c k s t h e c a p a c i t y t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e n a t u r e a n d o b j e c t o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t h i m

, t o

c o n s u l t w i t h c o u n s e l

, a n d t o a s s i s t i n p r e p a r i n g h i s d e f e n s e m a y n o t b e s u b

j e c t e d t o t r i a l

. ” 1 7

T h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t a n d a r d f o r c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l a s k s w h e t h e r t h e d e f e n d a n t h a s a

s u f f i c i e n t p r e s e n t a b i l i t y t o c o n s u l t w i t h h i s l a w y e r w i t h a r e a s o n a b l e d e g r e e o f r a t i o n a l

necks ope n, and show no e motion? What kind of person is that?

What doe s that say about a person? I t sa y s that they ’re a thre at. I t tells y ou

that they ’re dang erous.

* * *

He’ s shown absolutely no remorse and instead has done the complete

opposite by

say ing he wasn’t e ven ther e.

* * *

You watche d him testify during g uilt/i nnocenc e. Do y ou reme mber he told

y ou the story of how he went to his house and there was a man inside of his house?

“I don’t know who it was. I t wasn’t me. I wasn’t ther e.”

I know who was in his house and so do y ou. I t was the Def endant. I t was the

Def endant. And i t’s not that he ca n’t tell y ou; he won’t. And just as we discussed

during cross-e x amination of the Def endant, what kind of dang erous does that make

him? What kind of dang erous does that make him? What kind of dang erousne ss is

eng ender ed in the lac k of re morse?

1 6

E.g.

, Cooper v. Oklahoma

, 517 U.S. 348, 354 (1996) (“We have repe atedly and consistently

rec og nized that ‘the criminal trial of an incompetent defe n dant violates due proce ss.’”) (quoting

Medina v . Calif

ornia , 505 U.S. 437, 453 (1992)).

1 7

Drope v . Missouri , 420 U.S. 162, 171 (1975).Turner — 22

u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d w h e t h e r h e h a s a r a t i o n a l a s w e l l a s f a c t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e

p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t h i m

. D u e p r o c e s s a l s o m a n d a t e s s t a t e p r o c e d u r e s t h a t a r e a d e q u a t e t o 1 8

a s s u r e t h a t i n c o m p e t e n t d e f e n d a n t s a r e n o t p u t t o t r i a l

. T o t h a t e n d

, o u r s t a t u t o r y s c h e m e 1 9

h a s c o d i f

i e d t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t a n d a r d f o r c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l a n d h a s e l a b o r a t e l y

d e s c r i b e d t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t r e q u i r e

, a n d p r o c e d u r e s f o r m a k i n g

, a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f

w h e t h e r a d e f

e n d a n t i s c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

. 2 0

A

. S u b s t a n t i v e S t a n d a r d

T h e T e x a s L e g i s l a t u r e h a s a d o p t e d t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t a n d a r d f o r c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d

t r i a l i n A r t i c l e 4 6 B

. 0 0 3 ( a ) o f t h e T e x a s C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e

. T h e a p p e l l a n t i n t h i s 2 1

c a s e d o e s n o t c o n t e n d t h a t h e l a c k e d a t l e a s t a f a c t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s

a g a i n s t h i m

. T h e r e i s n o r e a s o n t o d o u b t t h a t h e u n d e r s t o o d t h a t h i s l i f e a n d l i b e r t y w e r e a t

s t a k e a n d w h a t r o l e s t h e v a r i o u s p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s p l a y e d

. A t i s s u e i s w h e t h e r

t h e r e w a s a n y s u b s t a n t i v e i n d i c a t i o n t h a t h e l a c k e d e i t h e r a r a t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e

p r o c e e d i n g s o r a p r e s e n t s u f f i c i e n t a b i l i t y t o c o n s u l t w i t h c o u n s e l w i t h a r e a s o n a b l e d e g r e e

1 8

Dusky v. United States , 362 U.S. 402, 402 (1960).

1 9

Pate v. Robinson , 383 U.S. 375, 378 (1966).

2 0

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . ch. 46B , subch. A-C.

2 1

See T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art. 46B.003( a)( 1) & (2) (“A person is incompetent to stand trial

if the person does not ha

ve . . . suff

icient pre sent ability

to consult w ith the person’ s lawy er with a

rea sonable deg ree of rational understanding ; or

. . . a rational as well as fac tual understanding of the

proce eding s ag ainst the person.” ).Turner — 23

o f r a t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g

— o r

, a s t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n t h i s c a s e o r d e r e d D r

. A l m e i d a t o a s s e s s

,

w h e t h e r h e w a s “ a b l e t o r a t i o n a l l y a s s i s t h i s l a w y e r s i n t h e d e f e n s e o f h i s c a s e

. ”

T h e L e g i s l a t u r e a p p a r e n t l y r e g a r d s a d e f e n d a n t ’ s c a p a c i t y t o r a t i o n a l l y a s s i s t i n t h e

p r e p a r a t i o n a n d e x e c u t i o n o f h i s d e f e n s e t o b e i n d i s p e n s a b l e t o a d e f e n d a n t ’ s c o m p e t e n c y t o

s t a n d t r i a l

. W e m a y i n f

e r t h i s f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t i t h a s d i r e c t e d t h a t f o r e n s i c p s y c h o l o g i s t s a n d

p s y c h i a t r i s t s a p p o i n t e d b y t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o p e r f o r m c o m p e t e n c y e v a l u a t i o n s s h o u l d

s p e c i f i c a l l y c o n s i d e r

, a m o n g o t h e r t h i n g s : 1 ) t h e d e f e n d a n t ’ s “ c a p a c i t y

. . . d u r i n g c r i m i n a l

p r o c e e d i n g s t o

. . . e n g a g e i n a r e a s o n e d c h o i c e o f l e g a l s t r a t e g i e s a n d o p t i o n s ; ” a s w e l l a s

2 ) “ t h e i m p a c t o f t h e m e n t a l i l l n e s s o r m e n t a l r e t a r d a t i o n

, i f e x i s t e n t

, o n t h e d e f e n d a n t ’ s

c a p a c i t y t o e n g a g e w i t h c o u n s e l i n a r e a s o n a b l e a n d r a t i o n a l m a n n e r [

. ] ” T h e s e l e g i s l a t i v e 2 2

c r i t e r i a f o r c o m p e t e n c y c o n t e m p l a t e a d e f e n d a n t w h o i s a t l e a s t m i n i m a l l y a b l e t o i n t e r a c t

w i t h h i s t r i a l c o u n s e l i n a “ r e a s o n a b l e a n d r a t i o n a l ” w a y ( e v e n i f t h e y d o n o t n e c e s s a r i l y

a g r e e ) i n f

o r m u l a t i n g d e c i s i o n s h o w m o s t e f f e c t i v e l y t o p u r s u e h i s d e f e n s e

.

O t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s h a v e c o n s t r u e d t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t a n d a r d f o r c o m p e t e n c e t o s t a n d

t r i a l c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g

. V a r i o u s c o u r t s h a v e d e c l a r e d d e f e n d a n t s t o b e

i n c o m p e t e n t u n d e r t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s t a n d a r d u p o n f i n d i n g s t h a t t h e y s u f

f e r e d f r o m m e n t a l

2 2

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art. 46B.024 §§ (1 )( C ) & (4) (empha sis added)

. (Section 4 of

Article 46B .024 was amended in 2011, afte r t he appellant’s t rial, and prese ntly rea ds: “the de g ree

of i mpairment resulting from the m ental il lness or m ental retarda tion, if exis tent, and t h e s p ec i fi c

impact on the defe ndant’s capa city to eng ag e with counsel in a rea sonable and rational manner .”

Acts 2011, 82nd L eg

., ch. 822, § 7, p. 1897, eff

. Sept. 1, 2011.). See Morris v. State , 301 S.W .3d

281, 285-86 & n.10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (fa ctors listed in Article 46B.024 are “re levant” to the

deter mination of competenc y

, including whether the defe ndant can “eng ag e in a rea soned choice of

leg al strateg ies and options”).Turner — 24

i l l n e s s e s c a u s i n g p a r a n o i d d e l u s i o n s t h a t i m p a c t e d t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n o f r e a l i t y i n w a y s t h a t

a d v e r s e l y a f

f e c t e d t h e i r a b i l i t y t o r a t i o n a l l y c o m p r e h e n d t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t t h e m o r

i n t e r a c t r a t i o n a l l y w i t h t r i a l c o u n s e l

. A n d w e t h i n k t h e r e i s p a r t i c u l a r c a u s e f o r c o n c e r n 2 3

2 3

See

, e.g.

, Commonwealth v. K ennedy

, 30 5 A.2d 890 (Pa. 1973) (evide nce did not support

trial court’s finding that the appellant was competent to stand trial when testimony showed without

c o n tr a d iction that he suffe red from para noid schizophrenia and his mental illness p r e v e n te d h im f r o m

cooper ating with trial counsel); State v. Pede rsen

, 309 N.W.2d 490, 501 (I owa 1981) (althoug h the

defe ndant appea

red to have a fac tual understanding of the proce eding s ag ainst him, delusions fuele d

by schizophrenia preve nted him from coope ratingwith defe nse counse l, rende ring him “unable to

assist effe ctively

in his defense ”); United States v. Blohm

, 579 F.Supp. 495, 505 (S.D.N.Y. 1983)

( Dusky standard not sa tisfied when, a lthough he had fa ctual under standing of the proce eding s, the

defe ndant harbor ed cer

tain delusional beliefs that rende red him “ unable to c onsult with his lawy er

and assist in his own defe nse”) ; Strickland v. Francis

, 738 F.2d 15 4 2, 1551 (11 Cir. 1984) t h

(over turning a state-c ourt finding that t h e ap plicant was competent to stand trial beca use expert

testimony overw helmingly established that h i s mental illness cause d delusions that rende red him

“unable to understand the nature of the proce eding s ag ainst him a nd to pa rticipate meaning fully in

his d ef en s e” ); United St ates v. Hemsi

, 901 F.2d 293, 296 (2 Cir. 1990) (evidence supported the n d

trial court’s finding of i n co m p et en cy beca use the appellant’ s “major psy chiatric disorder and his

impaired sense of rea lity preve nted him from focusing on his leg al needs and from acting eff ectively

on his intellectual understanding

, and would preve nt him fr o m co o p era ting rationally in his

defe nse”) ; Lafferty v. Cook

, 949 F.2d 1546, 1556 (10 Cir. 1991) (state court err ed to find the t h

applicant c ompetent on the basis of a simple f actua l unde rstanding of the proce eding s ag ainst him

wher e his para

noid delusions rende red him unable “to rea listi cally deter mine wher e his best interests

lie”); United States v. Boigegrain

, 155 F.3d 1181, 1189-90 (10 Cir. 1998) (evide nce suf ficient to t h

support trial court’s finding of incompetenc y when “the defe ndant was delusional and suffe red from

‘par anoid ideation,’ causing him to believe that his lawy er was participa ting in a conspirac y

, along

with the prosec utor and the judge

, to incar cer ate him for rea sons unrela ted to the char g e ag ainst

him”); United States v. Ghane

, 490 F.3d 1036, 1040 (8 Cir. 2007) (evide nce sufficie nt to support t h

trial court’s finding of incompetenc y beca use, though the defe ndant had a fac tual understanding of

the proce eding s ag ainst him, “that understanding was not rational beca use it was premised on his

delusion of a g overnme nt c onspiracy working ag ainst him, including the doctors, lawy ers, a nd the

court” ); People v. Mondragon

, 217 P.3d 936 (Co l o

. Ap p

. 2 009) (trial court err ed to find the

defe ndant competent based on fac tual understanding of the proce eding s alone when his mental

illness preve nted him from making a rational decision whether to testify in his own behalf ). See also

W ilcoxson v. State

, 22 S.W .3d 289, 305 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999) (“[C] ourts have acknow ledg ed

that, even if a criminal defe ndant has an intellectual understanding of the char g es ag ainst him, he

may be incompetent i f h i s impaired sense of rea lity substantially undermines his judgme nt and

preve nts him from cooper ating rationally with his lawy er[.]”). Other cou r ts h a v e f o ll owed suit, albeit

in unpublished decisions. See United States v. Nagy

, No. 96 CR 601(RW S), 1998 WL 341940, atTurner — 25

w h e n a d e f

e n d a n t ’ s m e n t a l i m p a i r m e n t d i r e c t l y t o u c h e s u p o n c e r t a i n f u n d a m e n t a l d e c i s i o n s

t h a t t h e c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e s y s t e m r e s e r v e s f o r h i m t o m a k e p e r s o n a l l y

— a l b e i t a f t e r “ e n g a g i n g ”

m e a n i n g f

u l l y w i t h c o u n s e l

— s u c h a s w h e t h e r t o t e s t i f y i n h i s o w n d e f

e n s e

. P r e c i s e l y 2 4

b e c a u s e t h e d e f

e n d a n t r e t a i n s u l t i m a t e a u t h o r i t y o v e r t h e s e d e c i s i o n s

, i t i s c r i t i c a l t h a t h e b e

a b l e “ t o c o n s u l t w i t h c o u n s e l w i t h a r e a s o n a b l e d e g r e e o f r a t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g ” a b o u t

t h e m

. 2 5

*7 (S.D.N.Y. J une 26, 1998) (the defe ndant’s “under standing of the pending criminal proce eding s

is nece ssarily skewe d by his [delusional] belief th at t here is a conspirac y ag ainst him involving,

am ong others, judge s, the Gover nment, a priest, his landlord, and all psy chiatrists who have

examined him”); United States v. Bauman

, No. 07-20052-KH V, 2008 WL 2560706, at *7 (D. Kan.

J une 26, 2008) (notwithstanding evidenc e that the defe ndant had a fa ct ual understanding of the

proce eding s, the trial court “finds that due to a delusional disorder, defe ndant lacks sufficie nt contac t

with rea lity to the extent that he cannot rationally consult with or cooper ate with his attorney in this

case ”); Aldridge v. Thaler

, No. H-05-608, 2010 WL 1050335, at *33 (S.D. Texas Marc h 17, 2010)

(“Without the ability to make cruc ial decisions and add rele vant information to the defe nse,

co m munication [wit h counsel] does not amount to the consultation or assistance require d by th e

Supreme Court.”); State v. W illiamson

, No. 1106025042, 2013 WL 268981, at * 9 (De l. Super. Ct.

J anuar y 23, 2013) (“[D]efense lawy ers must provid e t h e b es t defe nse consistent with the client’s

direc tion. Howeve r, when delusions infec t the proce ss with fanc iful aber rations, the trial would be

a mocker y of justice. Where a psy chotic disorder prec ludes a meaning ful defe nse, then no one can

be subjec t to the ga

untlet of trial.”)

.

2 4

See Jo n es v. Barnes

, 463 U.S. 745, 751 (1983) (in a criminal case

, “the acc used has the

ultimate authority to make cer tain fundame ntal decisions reg arding the case

, as to whether to plead

g uilty

, waive a jury

, testify in his or her own behalf

, or take an appea l”); Ex parte Mines

, 26 S.W .3d

910, 915 (T ex

. C ri m. App. 2000) (“A nother rea son for requiring competenc y at trial is that the

d efendant m ust make significa nt choice s that require the advice of counsel but that are ulti m at el y

decide d by the defe ndant. The defe ndant must be competent to decide whether to invoke or to waive

such per sonal constitutional rights.”) (citations omitted).

2 5

S ee Mo n d ragon

, supra

, at 942 (“[I ]f defe ndant’s mental disease or defe ct rende red hi m

incapa ble of deciding rationally whether to testi fy

, t h en

, beca use of the nature of that rig ht, he

nece ssarily lacke d the sufficie nt prese nt ability to consult with his lawy er with a rea sonable deg ree

of rational understanding and the requisite fac tual and ra t i o n al understanding of the proce eding s

ag ainst him.”).Turner — 26

T h i s i s n o t t o i m p l y t h a t a d e f e n d a n t ’ s m e n t a l i l l n e s s p l u s h i s f a i l u r e t o c o m m u n i c a t e

w i t h c o u n s e l w i l l i n v a r i a b l y o r n e c e s s a r i l y a d d u p t o a f i n d i n g o f i n c o m p e t e n c e

. T h e f a c t t h a t

a d e f e n d a n t i s m e n t a l l y i l l d o e s n o t b y i t s e l f m e a n h e i s i n c o m p e t e n t

. N o r d o e s t h e s i m p l e 2 6

f a c t t h a t h e o b s t i n a t e l y r e f u s e s t o c o o p e r a t e w i t h h i s t r i a l c o u n s e l

. I n d e e d

, e v e n a m e n t a l l y 2 7

i l l d e f e n d a n t w h o r e s i s t s c o o p e r a t i n g w i t h h i s c o u n s e l m a y n e v e r t h e l e s s b e f o u n d c o m p e t e n t

i f t h e m a n i f

e s t a t i o n s o f h i s p a r t i c u l a r m e n t a l i l l n e s s a r e n o t s h o w n t o b e t h e e n g i n e o f h i s

o b s t i n a c y

. B u t w h e n a d e f e n d a n t ’ s m e n t a l i l l n e s s o p e r a t e s i n s u c h a w a y a s t o p r e v e n t h i m 2 8

f r o m r a t i o n a l l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t h i m o r e n g a g i n g r a t i o n a l l y w i t h

c o u n s e l i n t h e p u r s u i t o f h i s o w n b e s t i n t e r e s t s

, h e c a n n o t b e m a d e t o s t a n d t r i a l c o n s i s t e n t

w i t h d u e p r o c e s s

. E v i d e n c e t h a t r a i s e s t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y n e c e s s i t a t e s a n i n f o r m a l i n q u i r y

, a n d

i f t h a t i n q u i r y r e v e a l s t h a t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y i s s u b s t a n t i a l

, a f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l i s r e q u i r e d

.

B

. P r o c e d u r e

U n d e r o u r c u r r e n t s t a t u t o r y s c h e m e

, a n y “ s u g g e s t i o n ” o f i n c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l 2 9

2 6

Moore v. State

, 999 S.W .2d 385, 395 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Bouchillon v. Colli ns

, 907

F.2d 589, 593 ( 5 Cir. 1990). t h

2 7

See Ree d v. State

, 112 S.W .3d 706, 710 (Tex. App.—Houston [14 Dist.] 2003, pet. ref ’d) t h

(“I t is not enoug h for counsel to alleg e unspecifie d difficulties i n co m m u n i cating with the

defe ndant.”) (citing Moore

, supra , at 394).

2 8

Lofti n v. State , 660 S.W .2d 543, 546-47 (Te x . Crim. App. 1983).

2 9

I n 2003, the L eg islature compre hensively revised the proce dures g overning deter minations

of competenc y to stand trial, repe aling fo rm er Ar t icle 46.02 of the Texas Code of Criminal

Procedur e, and repla cing it with curr ent Chapter 46B. See Acts 2003, 78 L eg

., ch. 35, §§ 1 & 15, t h

pp. 57-68 & 72, eff

. J an. 1, 2004.Turner — 27

c a l l s f o r a n “ i n f

o r m a l i n q u i r y ” t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r e v i d e n c e e x i s t s t o j u s t i f y a f o r m a l

c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

. I n 2 0 0 9

, t h i s C o u r t h e l d t h a t e v i d e n c e t h a t a “ s u g g e s t i o n ” o f 3 0

i n c o m p e t e n c y s u f

f i c i e n t t o t r i g g e r a n i n f

o r m a l i n q u i r y w a s t h e s a m e a s t h e b o n a f i d e d o u b t

s t a n d a r d f

r o m t h e p r e v i o u s s t a t u t o r y r e g i m e

. T h e L e g i s l a t u r e h a s s u b s e q u e n t l y r e j e c t e d t h e 3 1

b o n a f i d e d o u b t s t a n d a r d f

o r p u r p o s e s o f A r t i c l e 4 6 B

. 0 0 4

, b u t t h e a m e n d m e n t b y w h i c h t h i s

w a s a c c o m p l i s h e d d i d n o t b e c o m e e f f e c t i v e u n t i l S e p t e m b e r 1

, 2 0 1 1

, s e v e r a l m o n t h s a f t e r

t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s t r i a l

. I n a n y e v e n t

, h e r e

, a t l e a s t a s o f M a y 2 0

, 2 0 1 1

, w h e n v o i r d i r e w a s 3 2

i n t e r r u p t e d f

o r t h e h e a r i n g a t w h i c h D r

. A l m e i d a t e s t i f i e d

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t w a s o b v i o u s l y

p e r s u a d e d t h a t a b o n a f i d e d o u b t d i d e x i s t a s t o t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c o m p e t e n c y

.

T h e q u e s t i o n t h e r e f

o r e b e c o m e s w h e t h e r

, i n l i g h t o f w h a t b e c a m e k n o w n t o t h e t r i a l

3 0

See T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art. 46B.004( c) (“O n sug g estion that t h e d ef en dant may be

incompetent to stand trial, the court shall deter mine by informal inquiry whether there is some

evidenc e from any source that would support a finding that the defe ndant m ay b e i n co mpetent to

stand trial.”)

.

3 1

Montoya v. State

, 291 S.W .3d 420, 425 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009 ) (“ s u gges t ion” m eans the

same as bona fide doubt under former statutory provisions; hence

, “[i] f a trial judge has a bona fide

doubt about the competenc y of the defe n d an t

, h e or she shall conduct an informal inquiry to

deter mine if there is e vidence that would support a finding of incompetenc e”)

. Cf. Alcott v. State

, 51 S.W .3d 596, 600-01 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (under the former statutory scheme

, bona fide doubt

trig g ere d competenc y inquiry during which the trial court must deter mi n e wh et h er there is “some

evidenc e” to support a

finding of incompete ncy so as to trig g er a

formal c ompetency

hear ing)

.

3 2

See Acts 2011, 82 L eg

., ch. 822, §§ 2 & 21(b), p.1895 & 1901, eff

. Sept. 1, 2011 (adding n d

Subsection (c- 1) to Article 46B.004 to provide that: “A sug g estion of incompetenc y is the threshold

require ment for an informal inquiry under Subsection (c) and may consist solely of a repr esenta tion

from any cre dible source that the defe ndant may be incompetent. A further evidentiar y showing is

not require d to initiate the inquiry

, and the court is not require d to have a bona fide doubt about the

competenc y

of the de fenda

nt.”).Turner — 28

c o u r t b y t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h i s i n f o r m a l i n q u i r y

, i t s h o u l d h a v e c o n d u c t e d a f o r m a l

c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

. T h e a n s w e r d e p e n d s u p o n w h e t h e r “ s o m e e v i d e n c e f r o m a n y s o u r c e ” h a d

a r i s e n b y t h a t t i m e “ t h a t w o u l d s u p p o r t a f i n d i n g t h a t [ t h e a p p e l l a n t ] m a y b e i n c o m p e t e n t t o

s t a n d t r i a l

. ” I n m a k i n g t h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n

, a t r i a l c o u r t m u s t c o n s i d e r o n l y t h a t e v i d e n c e

3 3

t e n d i n g t o s h o w i n c o m p e t e n c y

, “ p u t t i n g a s i d e a l l c o m p e t i n g i n d i c a t i o n s o f c o m p e t e n c y

, t o

f i n d w h e t h e r t h e r e i s s o m e e v i d e n c e

, a q u a n t i t y m o r e t h a n n o n e o r a s c i n t i l l a

, t h a t r a t i o n a l l y

m a y l e a d t o a c o n c l u s i o n o f i n c o m p e t e n c y

. ” I f s o

, t h e n “ e v i d e n c e e x i s t s t o s u p p o r t a 3 4

f i n d i n g o f i n c o m p e t e n c y

, ” a n d t h e s t a t u t o r y s c h e m e r e q u i r e s t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o c o n d u c t a

f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

. 3 5

3 3

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . art. 46B .004(c)

.

3 4

Ex parte LaHood , 401 S.W .3d 45, 52-53 (Te x . Crim. App. 2013) (quoting Sisco v. State

, 599 S.W .2d 607, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (plurality opinion)). See also W illiams v. State

, 663

S.W .2d 832, 834 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (apply ing Sisco

, and construing prior statutory lang uag e

that require d a formal competen cy h earing upon a deter mination that there is evidenc e from any

source “to support a finding of incompetenc y to stand trial”); Barber v. State

, 737 S.W .2d 824, 828

(Tex

. Crim. App. 1987) (same) ; Geor g e E. Dix & J ohn M. Schmolesky

, 43 T E X A S P R A C T I C E :

C R I M I N A L P R A C T I C E A N D P R O C E D U R E § 31:36, at 49 (3 ed. 2011) (“The lang uag e used [i n the rd

curr ent statutory scheme ] for the standard to de termine whether a hear ing must be held is identical

to that in the former statute deter mining whether a jury trial was require d. This clea rly incorporates

the ca se law de velopment of that c riterion[.] ”).

3 5

See T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art. 46B.005( a) & (b) (if informal inquiry reve als “that evidenc e

exis ts to support a finding of incompetenc y ,” then the trial court should order an expert examination

and “shall hold a trial

. . . befor e deter mining whether the defe ndant is incompetent to stand trial”);

Geor g e E. Dix & J ohn M. Schmolesky

, 43 T E X A S P R A C T I C E : C R I M I N A L P R A C T I C E A N D P R O C E D U R E

§ 31:53, at 63 (3 ed. 2011) (“A trial on the merits of the c ompetency issue is appare ntly

require d rd

if the trial court deter

mines that evidenc e exis ts to support a finding of incompetenc y

. This standard

uses the same term i n o l o gy as fo rm er

. . . Article 46.02, section 4(a) of the Code of Criminal

Procedur e. Almost cer

tainly

, it will be g iven the same interpre tat i o n as t hat prior statutory

lang uag e.”)

. I f “evidence exis ts to support a finding of i ncompetenc y ,” a trial is mandated unlessTurner — 29

S h o u l d t h e f

o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l r e s u l t i n a f i n d i n g o f c o m p e t e n c y

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t

i s n o t o b l i g e d t o r e v i s i t t h e i s s u e l a t e r a b s e n t a m a t e r i a l c h a n g e o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s s u g g e s t i n g

t h a t t h e d e f

e n d a n t ’ s m e n t a l s t a t u s h a s d e t e r i o r a t e d

. H o w e v e r

, e s p e c i a l l y w h e n t h e r e h a s 3 6

b e e n a s u g g e s t i o n o f i n c o m p e t e n c y b u t n o f o r m a l a d j u d i c a t i o n o f t h e i s s u e

, d u e p r o c e s s

r e q u i r e s t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o r e m a i n e v e r v i g i l a n t f o r c h a n g e s i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t w o u l d m a k e

a f o r m a l a d j u d i c a t i o n a p p r o p r i a t e

. I n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e

, w e f i n d n o f a u l t i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s 3 7

f a i l u r e t o c o n d u c t a f

o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l f o l l o w i n g t h e i n i t i a l e v a l u a t i o n s b y D r s

. G o l l a h e r

a n d A x e l r a d

, s i n c e t h e y d e e m e d t h e a p p e l l a n t t o b e c o m p e t e n t

. A f t e r a l l

, t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s t r i a l

c o u n s e l m a d e n o r e q u e s t f o r a f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l a t t h a t t i m e

. B u t a s o f M a y 2 0

, 2 0 1 1

,

w h e n t h e t r i a l c o u r t c o n c l u d e d i t s i n f o r m a l i n q u i r y

, t h e r e w a s s o m e e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t a

r a t i o n a l f i n d i n g o f i n c o m p e t e n c e

, a n d

, f o r t h e r e a s o n s t h a t w e d e s c r i b e b e l o w

, t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s

r e q u e s t f o r a f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l s h o u l d t h e n h a v e b e e n g r a n t e d

.

I I I

. A n a l y s i s

S h o r t l y a f

t e r i n d i c t m e n t i n A p r i l o f 2 0 1 0

, a n d b e f o r e t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s a f

f o r d e d m u c h

the parties can ag ree without a trial that the defe ndant is incompetent. T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. arts.

46B.005( a)- (c)

, 4 6 B. 054. Unlike the former statutory reg ime, which require d that a jury be

empane led to deter

mine competenc y

, under the curr ent statute, the trial court makes the ultimate

deter mination with respe ct to competenc y unless either of the parties or the trial court itself reg isters

a pre fer ence that “a jur

y shall make that de termination.” T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . art. 46B .051.

3 6

E.g.

, Ferguson v. State

, 579 S.W .2d 2

, 4 -5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979); Bigby v. State

, 892

S.W .2d 864, 885 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994).

3 7

See Drope

, supra , at 181 (“ Even whe n a def endant is competent at t he commencement of

his trial, a trial cour

t must alway s be ale rt to circumstanc es sug g esting a cha ng e that would re nder

the ac cused una

ble to meet the standa

rds of c ompetence to stand trial.”).Turner — 30

o f a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o i n t e r a c t w i t h G o n z a l e z

, h i s f i r s t

- a p p o i n t e d t r i a l c o u n s e l

, b o t h D r

.

G o l l a h e r a n d D r

. A x e l r a d d e e m e d h i m c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

. T h e r e c o r d d o e s n o t s h o w

t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d a h i s t o r y o f m e n t a l i l l n e s s

. N e v e r t h e l e s s

, b o t h o f t h e c o m p e t e n c y

r e p o r t s r e f

l e c t t h e s u b s t a n t i a l p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t h e w a s s u f f e r i n g f r o m p a r a n o i a t h a t m a y h a v e

b e e n t h e p r o d u c t o f “ a p a r a n o i d d i s o r d e r

, ” a n d t h a t h e w a s a p p a r e n t l y e x h i b i t i n g d e l u s i o n s

.

G o l l a h e r e x p r e s s l y f

o u n d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d a f a c t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s

a n d c o u l d “ c o m m u n i c a t e e v e n t s i n a n u n d e r s t a n d a b l e m a n n e r a n d c a n r e p o r t h i s s t a t e o f

m i n d

. ” B u t h e r r e p o r t d i d n o t s p e a k s p e c i f i c a l l y t o w h e t h e r h i s c o n d i t i o n w o u l d a d v e r s e l y

a f f e c t h i s c a p a c i t y e i t h e r t o “ e n g a g e w i t h c o u n s e l i n a r e a s o n a b l e a n d r a t i o n a l m a n n e r [

, ] ” o r

t o “ e n g a g e i n a r e a s o n e d c h o i c e o f l e g a l s t r a t e g i e s a n d o p t i o n s [

. ] ” A x e l r a d ’ s r e p o r t d i d 3 8

s p e a k t o t h o s e c a p a c i t i e s a n d

, i n f a c t

, h e f o u n d t h e a p p e l l a n t t o b e “ m i l d l y i m p a i r e d ” w i t h

r e s p e c t t o b o t h

. A x e l r a d n o t e d t h a t

, “ [ i ] n t h e e v e n t [ t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ] h a s a p a r a n o i d

d i s o r d e r

, t h i s m a y b e c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e p r o b l e m s h e i s e x p e r i e n c i n g w i t h h i s a t t o r n e y

. ”

N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e e x p e r t s ’ u l t i m a t e c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s c o m p e t e n t

, t h e t r i a l

c o u r t w a s e f

f e c t i v e l y p u t o n n o t i c e o f t h e n e e d t o m a i n t a i n v i g i l a n c e t o a s s u r e t h a t t h e

a p p e l l a n t ’ s d u e p r o c e s s r i g h t s w e r e p r e s e r v e d

.

B a r e l y o v e r a m o n t h a f

t e r t h e i n i t i a l e v a l u a t i o n s

, t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s a t t o r n e y s w e r e a l r e a d y

e x p e r i e n c i n g “ a l i t t l e b i t o f a d i s c o n n e c t ” w i t h h i m

. B y N o v e m b e r o f 2 0 1 0

, t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d

f i l e d a g r i e v a n c e a g a i n s t h i s l a w y e r s a n d r e q u e s t e d a n e w “ d e f e n s e t e a m

. ” I n D e c e m b e r

,

3 8

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . art. 46B .024(4) & (1)( C), respe ctively

.Turner — 31

G o n z a l e z ’ s c o n t i n u e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e a p p e l l a n t b e c a m e “ u n t e n a b l e ” a f t e r t h e a p p e l l a n t

t h r e a t e n e d h i m w i t h p h y s i c a l v i o l e n c e o v e r t h e i r d i s a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e d e f e n s e s t r a t e g y t o

d e p o s e t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c h i l d r e n

. B y A p r i l o f 2 0 1 1

, i t b e g a n t o e m e r g e t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s

d i s p l e a s u r e w i t h t r i a l c o u n s e l i n v o l v e d m o r e t h a n t h e d e p o s i t i o n s a l o n e ; h e w a s a l s o u p s e t

t h a t t r i a l c o u n s e l w e r e n o t p u r s u i n g a s u f f i c i e n t l y v i g o r o u s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o h i s a p p a r e n t l y

d e l u s i o n a l

— a n d

, i n a n y e v e n t

, c l e a r l y i r r e l e v a n t

— c l a i m t h a t t h e M a y o r o f K e n d l e t o n h a d

s i r e d h i s y o u n g e s t c h i l d

. A c c o r d i n g t o M o n c r i f f e

, “ H e s e e m s t o h a v e o n e t r a i n o f t h o u g h t

a n d h e d i s r e g a r d s a l l o t h e r r a t i o n a l t h o u g h t s c o m p l e t e l y

. ” T h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s p a r a n o i a h a d

p r o g r e s s e d t o t h e p o i n t t h a t

, i f t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f

h i s o w n l a w y e r s a r e t o b e c r e d i t e d

, h e

b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e y w e r e o p e n l y c o n s p i r i n g w i t h t h e p r o s e c u t o r s t o s e c u r e h i s c o n v i c t i o n

. H e

f l a t l y r e f u s e d t o c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h t h e m d u r i n g t h e v o i r d i r e p r o c e e d i n g s

.

W e t h i n k t h e p r e c e d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s a t l e a s t s o m e e v i d e n c e t h a t w o u l d

s u p p o r t a r a t i o n a l f

i n d i n g t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t l a c k e d t h e c a p a c i t y t o “ e n g a g e ” w i t h h i s t r i a l

c o u n s e l r a t i o n a l l y o r t o m a k e r a t i o n a l c h o i c e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o h i s l e g a l s t r a t e g i e s a n d o p t i o n s

.

I n f i n d i n g o t h e r w i s e a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e i n f o r m a l i n q u i r y o n M a y 2 0

, 2 0 1 1

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t

m a d e t w o m i s t a k e s

. F i r s t

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t f o c u s e d e r r o n e o u s l y o n e v i d e n c e o f c o m p e t e n c y

r a t h e r t h a n e v i d e n c e o f i n c o m p e t e n c y

, r e l y i n g u p o n t h e u l t i m a t e c o n c l u s i o n s o f D r s

. G o l l a h e r

a n d A x e l r a d

, a s w e l l a s D r

. A l m e i d a ’ s s u b s e q u e n t o p i n i o n t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c o g n i t i v e

f u n c t i o n i n g h a d n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y c h a n g e d i n t h e i n t e r i m

. B u t A l m e i d a w a s u n a b l e t o s a y t h a t

t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s c o m p e t e n t t o a s s i s t c o u n s e l i n h i s d e f e n s e

, a n d b o t h G o l l a h e r a n d A x e l r a dTurner — 32

o b s e r v e d s i g n s o f p a r a n o i d d e l u s i o n s t h a t w o u l d a t l e a s t m i n i m a l l y s u p p o r t a f i n d i n g t h a t t h e

a p p e l l a n t s u f

f e r e d f r o m a m e n t a l d i s o r d e r t h a t i m p a i r e d h i s a b i l i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e r a t i o n a l l y

i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n o f h i s d e f e n s e

. T h e i n t e r a c t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e a p p e l l a n t

a n d h i s t r i a l c o u n s e l i n t h e i n t e r v e n i n g m o n t h s c o n s t i t u t e d s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e t h a t A x e l r a d ’ s

n a s c e n t c o n c e r n s a b o u t t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s c a p a c i t y t o c o n s u l t r a t i o n a l l y w i t h h i s a t t o r n e y s w e r e

s u b s e q u e n t l y b o r n e o u t

. T h e r e w a s s o m e e v i d e n c e t h a t w o u l d r a t i o n a l l y s u p p o r t a f i n d i n g

o f i n c o m p e t e n c y t o s t a n d t r i a l

, n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g o t h e r e v i d e n c e t o t h e c o n t r a r y

.

S e c o n d

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t d e n i e d t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s r e q u e s t f o r a

f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t f a i l e d t o d e m o n s t r a t e a n y “ c h a n g e ”

o f s t a t u s s i n c e t h e e a r l i e r f i n d i n g s o f c o m p e t e n c y b y G o l l a h e r a n d A x e l r a d

. T h e r e w a s n o

a d j u d i c a t i o n o f t h e c o m p e t e n c y i s s u e i n t h e s u m m e r o f 2 0 1 0 f o l l o w i n g t h e i r e v a l u a t i o n s

— n o t

e v e n a n i n f

o r m a l i n q u i r y t o d e c i d e w h e t h e r t h e r e w a s s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e a t t h a t t i m e t o

i n v o k e a f

o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

. T h u s

, t h e r e w a s n o p r i o r j u d i c i a l c o m p e t e n c y

d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o j u s t i f

y a r e q u i r e m e n t o f a c h a n g e i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s

. M o r e o v e r

, e v e n h a d

t h e r e b e e n s o m e p r e v i o u s j u d i c i a l f i n d i n g o f c o m p e t e n c y

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t w a s m i s t a k e n t o

c o n c l u d e t h a t n o n e w c i r c u m s t a n c e s e x i s t e d t o m e r i t a s e c o n d l o o k

. B y M a y o f 2 0 1 1

, t h e r e

h a d a r i s e n n e w e v i d e n c e i n t h e f o r m o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s o b v i o u s l y i r r a t i o n a l b e l i e f t h a t h i s

o n g o i n g d e l u s i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e M a y o r o f K e n d l e t o n s o m e h o w p r o v i d e d h i m w i t h a

d e f e n s e t o p r o s e c u t i o n f

o r c a p i t a l m u r d e r t h a t w a s p r e f e r a b l e t o t h e a p p r o a c h t h a t h i s t r i a l

l a w y e r s u r g e d h i m t o p u r s u e

. T h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t p e r s i s t e d i n t h i s d e l u s i o n

- f u e l e d b e l i e fTurner — 33

a g a i n s t t h e e m p h a t i c a d v i c e o f c o u n s e l

, t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e e a r l i e r s u g g e s t i o n s t h a t h e s u f f e r e d

f r o m a p a r a n o i d d i s o r d e r

, w a s e n o u g h t o r a i s e t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f i n c o m p e t e n c y t o a l e v e l

b e y o n d t h a t w h i c h i s e v i n c e d b y a m e r e d i s p u t e b e t w e e n a n o r d i n a r i l y o b s t i n a t e d e f e n d a n t

a n d h i s l e g a l c o u n s e l o v e r p l a u s i b l e t r i a l s t r a t e g i e s

. I t i s a t l e a s t s o m e e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t

a r a t i o n a l f

i n d i n g t h a t

, b e c a u s e o f m e n t a l i l l n e s s

, t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s u n a b l e t o e n g a g e

r a t i o n a l l y w i t h h i s l a w y e r s a n d w a s t h e r e f o r e i n c a p a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g r a t i o n a l l y i n h i s o w n

d e f e n s e

. M o s t c r i t i c a l l y

, h e m a y w e l l h a v e b e e n i n c a p a b l e o f m a k i n g a r a t i o n a l

, n o n

3 9

d e l u s i o n a l d e c i s i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o w h e t h e r o r n o t t o a c c e p t h i s t r i a l c o u n s e l ’ s a d v i c e n o t t o

3 9

I n her dissenting opi nion, J udg e Keller relies heavily upon the l ack of expert opinion that

there was any “cur

rent evidenc e to substantiate a delusional or other psy chi atric disorder.”

Dissenting Opinion at 6. I t is true that none of the experts in this case ultimately expressed such an

opinion. Howeve r, it is not evident why the opinion of an expert should be considere d indispensable

to raising incompetenc y —espec ially considering our holding that an expert’s opinion is not

nece ssary to raise the defe nse of insanity (which, unlike the standard for incompetenc y to stand trial,

expressly require s a finding that the def endant’ s condition be “a

result of sever e mental disea se or

d ef ect”). Cf. Pache co v. State

, 757 S.W .2d 729, 736 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988) (“[W] e hold t h at

predic ated lay opinion testimony when considere d with fac ts and circ umstance s conce rning an

acc used and of t he offense may be suff icient to raise the issue [of insanity ].”); T E X

. P E N A L C O D E

§ 8.01(a)

. And while none of the experts here stated unequivoca lly that the appellant is mentally ill,

both Gollaher and Axelrad noted the possibili ty of para noid and delusional thinking on his part, and

Axelrad observe d that he was “an individual who may have a mental illness and [t hat] the diag nosis

may be a para

noid disorder.” Axelrad even found appellant to be at least “mildly impaired” on that

acc ount in his ability to rationally eng ag e with counsel about the case and about his choice of leg al

strateg ies and options. Almeida’s conclusion that the appellant display ed no delusional disorder was

based upon her perc eption that there wer e “no signific ant chang es in [t he appellant’ s] emotional or

cog nitive functioning ” since the y ear -old evalua tions of Gollaher and Axelrad. She took no acc ount

of the appellant’ s subsequent behavior s that mi g ht serve to substantiate the initial impressions of

Gollaher and Axelrad that he may suffe r from a “mental illness” that “may be a para noid disorder.”

These circ umstances constitute some evidenc e—at least “more than none or a scintilla,” see note 34,

ante

— th a t the appellant suffe rs from a debilitating mental illness—enoug h that, in combination with

some evidenc e of the other two fac tors, it may be said “that evidenc e exis ts to support a finding of

incompetenc y ” for

purposes of a

formal c ompetency

trial under A rticle 46B .005.Turner — 34

t e s t i f y

. 4 0

W e h a s t e n t o e m p h a s i z e t h e l i m i t e d s c o p e o f o u r h o l d i n g t o d a y

. T h i s i s n o t a c a s e i n

w h i c h t h e r e i s s o m e e v i d e n c e o f m e n t a l i l l n e s s b u t n o e v i d e n c e f r o m w h i c h i t m a y r e a s o n a b l y

b e i n f e r r e d t h a t t h e d e f

e n d a n t ’ s m e n t a l i l l n e s s r e n d e r s h i m i n c a p a b l e o f c o n s u l t i n g r a t i o n a l l y

w i t h c o u n s e l

. N o r i s i t a c a s e i n w h i c h t h e r e i s s o m e e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t o b s t i n a t e l y

r e f u s e s t o c o o p e r a t e w i t h c o u n s e l b u t n o t h i n g f r o m w h i c h t o r a t i o n a l l y i n f e r t h a t h i s o b s t i n a c y

i s f u e l e d b y m e n t a l i l l n e s s

. I t i s n o t e v e n a c a s e i n w h i c h t h e r e i s s o m e e v i d e n c e o f m e n t a l

i l l n e s s

, s o m e e v i d e n c e o f o b s t i n a c y

, b u t u l t i m a t e l y n o r a t i o n a l b a s i s t o i n f e r t h a t t h e o b s t i n a c y

i s a p r o d u c t o f t h e m e n t a l i l l n e s s

. N o n e o f t h e s e s c e n a r i o s w o u l d c o m p e l a f o r m a l

4 0

Supposing (without deciding ) that the appellant was i n competent, it is not difficult to

ima gi n e how his delusional beliefs could have tainted the trial proce ss. Taking the witness stand

ag ainst the advi ce o f co u n s el, he proce eded to testify at odds with the defe nsive posture of his

lawy ers based upon a wholesale denia l o f responsibility that was worse than implausible. This

opened the door for the prosec utors to expose the irrationality of his acc ount on cross-e x amination

and then to highlig ht, at both the g uilt and punishment phases of trial, that his willful re fu s al to

acknow ledg e blame w as nothing but a clea r sig nal of his endur ing thr eat to society . To the extent

that the appellant’ s disastrous decision to testify was the product of a conflict with trial counsel that

derive d from a para

noid patholog y

, it is con stitut ionally intolerable. The trial court err ed not to

conduct a formal competenc y trial that could have ruled out that substantial possibili ty befor e

proce eding to trial on the indictment.

We do not mean by these observa tions to sug g est that du e p ro ce ss err or in putting an

incompetent defe ndant to trial is nece ssarily subject to a constitutional harm analy sis. Although at

least one court has held such err or to be “structur al,” Mondragon

, supra

, at 942-43, neit her the

United States Supreme Court nor this Court has y et declare d whether the due proce ss violation of

try ing an incompetent defe ndant constitutes the ty pe of constitutional e r

r o r

, s u c h a s th o s e e numera ted

most rec ently in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez

, 548 U.S. 140, 148-49 (2006 ), t h at is not

susceptible to a harm analy sis. We have no occa sion to decide that question today

. We simply point

out that, if on remand the appellant in this case should inde ed be found to be incompetent to stand

trial, it is not hard to see how his incompetenc y had an obviously deleter ious impact on the conduct

of his trial, and pa

rticularly , his ex clusive dec ision whether or not to testify

.Turner — 35

c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

. I n s t e a d

, t h i s c a s e p r e s e n t s o n e o f t h e r e l a t i v e l y r a r e i n s t a n c e s i n w h i c h

t h e r e i s a t l e a s t s o m e e v i d e n c e f r o m w h i c h i t m a y r a t i o n a l l y b e i n f e r r e d n o t o n l

y 1 ) t h a t t h e

d e f e n d a n t s u f

f e r s s o m e d e g r e e o f d e b i l i t a t i n g m e n t a l i l l n e s s

, a n d t h a t 2 ) h e o b s t i n a t e l y

r e f u s e s t o c o o p e r a t e w i t h c o u n s e l t o h i s o w n a p p a r e n t d e t r i m e n t

, b u t a l s o t h a t 3 ) h i s m e n t a l

i l l n e s s i s w h a t f

u e l s h i s o b s t i n a c y

. W h e n e v e r a t r i a l c o u r t ’ s i n f o r m a l i n q u i r y e s t a b l i s h e s t h a t

t h e r e i s s o m e e v i d e n c e t h a t c o u l d r a t i o n a l l y s u p p o r t a l l t h r e e o f t h e s e i n f e r e n c e s

, i t s h o u l d

c o n d u c t a f

o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

.

T h e r e f o r e

, b e a r i n g f

i r m l y i n m i n d t h a t t h e s t a n d a r d f o r r e q u i r i n g a f

o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y

t r i a l i s n o t a p a r t i c u l a r l y o n e r o u s o n e

— w h e t h e r

, p u t t i n g a s i d e t h e e v i d e n c e o f c o m p e t e n c y

,

t h e r e i s m o r e t h a n a s c i n t i l l a o f e v i d e n c e t h a t w o u l d s u p p o r t a r a t i o n a l f i n d i n g o f f

a c t t h a t t h e

a c c u s e d i s i n c o m p e t e n t t o s t a n d t r i a l

— w e h o l d t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d i n f a i l i n g t o g r a n t 4 1

t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s r e q u e s t f o r a f o r m a l c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l u n d e r A r t i c l e 4 6 B

. 0 0 5

.

D I S P O S I T I O N

A c c o r d i n g l y

, w e s u s t a i n t h e a p p e l l a n t ’ s n i n t h p o i n t o f e r r o r

, a b a t e t h e a p p e a l

, a n d

r e m a n d t h e c a u s e t o t h e t r i a l c o u r t

. O n r e m a n d

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t s h a l l f i r s t d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r

i t i s p r e s e n t l y f

e a s i b l e t o c o n d u c t a r e t r o s p e c t i v e c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l

, g i v e n t h e p a s s a g e o f t i m e

,

a v a i l a b i l i t y o f e v i d e n c e

, a n d a n y o t h e r p e r t i n e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s

. S h o u l d t h e t r i a l c o u r t d e e m 4 2

4 1

See note 34, ante

.

4 2

See Geor g e E. Dix & J ohn M. Schmolesky

, 43 T E X A S P R A C T I C E : C R I M I N A L P R A C T I C E A N D

P R O C E D U R E § 31:81, at 89-90 & n.10 (3 ed. 2011) ( citing, e.g.

, Torres v. State , 593 S.W .2d 717, rd

719 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (re manding to trial court to decide

, inter alia

, whether “a nunc pro tuncTurner — 36

a r e t r o s p e c t i v e c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l t o b e f e a s i b l e

, i t s h a l l p r o c e e d t o c o n d u c t s u c h a t r i a l i n

a c c o r d a n c e w i t h C h a p t e r 4 6 B

, S u b c h a p t e r C

, o f t h e C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e

. 4 3

R e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r t h e t r i a l c o u r t d e e m s a r e t r o s p e c t i v e c o m p e t e n c y t r i a l t o b e f e a s i b l e

,

t h e r e c o r d o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s o n r e m a n d s h a l l t h e n b e r e t u r n e d t o t h i s C o u r t f o r r e i n s t a t e m e n t

o f t h e a p p e a l

. 4 4

D E L I V E R E D : O c t o b e r 3 0

, 2 0 1 3

P U B L I S H

deter mination of appellant’ s competenc y is not possi b le ” ) ; E x parte McKenzie

, 582 S.W .2d 153, 155

(Tex. Crim. App. 1979) (re manding case to the trial court to “ deter mine if it is possible to conduct

a nunc pro tunc competenc y hear ing and, if it is, to hold such a hear ing” under the then-e x tant

competenc y -to-stand-tr ial statute); Ex parte W infrey

, 581 S.W .2d 698, 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979)

(holding that the orig inal competenc y hear ing suffe red from a flawe d ju ry i n s truction, this Court

rema nded to the trial court for a deter mination whether

, inter alia

, a retro s p ective competenc y

hear ing w as fe asible))

.

4 3

T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C . ch. 46B , subch. C.

4 4

This Court has sometimes disposed of other appellate points of err or on orig inal submissi on

befor e rema

nding a cause for a retrospe ctive competenc y deter mination. E.g.

, Brandon v. State

, 599

S.W .2d 567, 5 7 4 (T ex. Crim. App. 1979) (opinion on orig inal submissi on); Barber v. State

, 737

S.W .2d 824, 829 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987). Three of the appellant’ s rema ining points of err or in this

case

, ho we v er

, involve the issue of whether he should have been allowed to repr esent himself at

various points at trial. See note 13, ante

. The ultimate resolution of the issue of his competenc y to

stand trial may

prove to have som e bearing on these point s of er ror. See Indiana v. Edwards , 554

U.S. 164, 178 (2008) (“[T] he C onstitut ion permits States to in sist upon repr esenta tion by counsel

for those competent enoug h to stand trial under Dusky but who still suffe r from sever e mental illness

to the point wher e th ey are not competent to conduct trial proce eding s by themselves.”)

. We

there fore believe tha t r esolution of these self-r epre sentation claims, if nece ssary

, would best awa it

o u r opinion afte r remand. The appellant’s remaining points of error involve claims that t h e S t at e

exercised c erta in pere mptory challeng es to discriminate a g ainst Afric an-A merica n venire men and

that the trial court err ed in failing to bench war rant the appellant from the penitentiary to assure his

attendanc e at the m o t i o n fo r new trial hear ing. The resolution of these claims also may prove

unnece ssary

. I n order to avoid resolving the appellant’ s points of err or piece meal—some now and

some later—w e will abstain from addre ssing any of them unless and until it should become

nece ssary to do so in our opinion after r emand.