Opinion ID: 1753624
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Walker Competent to Stand Trial

Text: Walker argues that the trial court erred in finding him competent to stand trial. On the first day of trial, the court granted a motion for a competency evaluation. In making this motion, Walker's counsel noted Walker's history of mental illness, the correspondences Walker had sent to the court, and discussions the defense lawyers had with Walker indicating an evaluation would be appropriate. A psychiatrist with the Lincoln Regional Center concluded that Walker showed no mental illness which would preclude the possibility of cooperating with his attorney in the preparation and presentation of a defense. Relying on this evaluation, the court found Walker competent to stand trial. [9-11] A person is competent to plead or stand trial if he or she has the capacity to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against him or her, to comprehend his or her condition in reference to such proceedings, and to make a rational defense. State v. Hittle, 257 Neb. 344, 598 N.W.2d 20 (1999). The question of competency to stand trial is one of fact to be determined by the court, and the means employed in resolving the question are discretionary with the court. State v. Jones, 258 Neb. 695, 605 N.W.2d 434 (2000); State v. Hittle, supra . The trial court's determination of competency will not be disturbed unless there is insufficient evidence to support the finding. Id. The psychiatrist's determination that Walker had the capacity to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against him and to comprehend such proceedings provided sufficient evidence to support the trial court's finding that Walker was competent to stand trial.