Opinion ID: 1449775
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Mental State and Methamphetamine Addiction

Text: Murphy asserts his mind was unclear and his decision making capacity was impaired at the time of his guilty pleas because Murphy was (1) not taking medication for a mental deficiency that required medication, and (2) suffering the long term effects of his methamphetamine addiction. Murphy contends he was incompetent to plead guilty and his guilty pleas were neither knowing nor voluntary. We disagree. A defendant is competent if []he possesses a `sufficient present ability to consult with h[is] lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding' and `has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings.' United States v. Martinez, 446 F.3d 878, 881 (8th Cir.2006) (quoting Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 402, 80 S.Ct. 788, 4 L.Ed.2d 824 (1960) (per curiam)). The district court's determination of the defendant's competency may include numerous factors, such as `expert medical opinions and the court's observation of the defendant's demeanor.' Id. (quoting United States v. Denton, 434 F.3d 1104, 1112 (8th Cir. 2006)). The district court's finding that a defendant is competent is reviewed for clear error. Id. (citing United States v. Robinson, 253 F.3d 1065, 1068 (8th Cir. 2001)). Even if suffering from a disease, a defendant's plea is valid if the record demonstrates that he `understood the charges against him, was not dissatisfied with the services rendered by his attorney, and entered his plea knowingly and voluntarily.' Rollins, 552 F.3d at 741-42 (quoting United States v. McNeely, 20 F.3d 886, 888 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam)). Whether [a] plea was knowing and voluntary is a mixed question of fact and law that we review de novo. Gray, 152 F.3d at 819 (citing Easter v. Norris, 100 F.3d 523, 525 (8th Cir.1996)). The district court did not err by determining Murphy was competent and his pleas were entered knowingly and voluntarily. Murphy presented the district court with no medical evidence to support his claim he was not taking prescription medication, or that he required medication to be mentally competent at the time he pled guilty. [2] The mental and psychiatric report, prepared approximately ten months after Murphy's guilty pleas, does not describe Murphy's mental condition at the time he pled guilty. To the extent the report is probative of Murphy's mental condition generally, the report identified no impairment in Murphy's ability to assist his counsel and indicated, Murphy appeared to possess a fundamentally accurate factual understanding of his current legal proceedings, including the criminal charges against him and the responsibilities of the judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney. The report concluded, Murphy appeared to possess a reasonable factual and rational level of understanding regarding his current legal case. He also appeared to possess the capacity to meaningfully interact with counsel, provided he abstains from the use of alcohol, methamphetamine, and remains medication compliant. [3] Nothing in the report indicates Murphy was incompetent, or that his guilty pleas were unknowing or involuntary. At the plea hearing, Murphy unequivocally stated (1) he was not on any medication, (2) nothing about his anxiety and depression interfered with his ability to understand the proceedings, (3) he was not under the influence of any drug or alcohol, (4) he fully understood what he was doing at the plea hearing, and (5) he was fully satisfied with his lawyer's representation. Murphy's statements strongly support the district court's finding Murphy was competent and his plea was entered knowingly and voluntarily. Finally, none of the testimony at the hearing on the motion to withdraw Murphy's guilty pleas indicated Murphy was incompetent or that his pleas were entered unknowingly or involuntarily. Because all available evidence suggested Murphy was competent and his pleas were entered knowingly and voluntarily, the district court did not abuse its discretion by determining Murphy's alleged mental condition and methamphetamine addiction did not constitute a fair and just reason for withdrawing his guilty pleas.