Court Opinion

ID: 9405010
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-27 00:00:34.977094+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:18.554591
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30795        Document: 00516800147             Page: 1      Date Filed: 06/26/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit

                                      No. 22-30795
                                                                                       FILED
                                                                                     June 26, 2023
                                     ____________
                                                                                     Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                              Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Anotche Wix,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                              USDC No. 2:08-CR-76-2
                     ______________________________

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         Before the court is an appeal of a final judgment revoking Anotche
   Wix’s term of supervised release and imposing an additional fourteen-month
   term of imprisonment. Both the Government and Wix agree that the district
   court erred in this matter by failing to order a competency hearing prior to
   revoking Wix’s supervised release. We agree and VACATE the district
   court’s order and REMAND the case.

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-30795     Document: 00516800147           Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/26/2023

                                    No. 22-30795

                              Factual Background
          After a two-day jury trial in 2009, Wix was found guilty of attempted
   bank robbery or aiding and abetting attempted bank robbery under 18 U.S.C.
   § 2113(a) and 2113(d) (Count 1); using and carrying or aiding and abetting in
   the using and carrying of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of
   violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (Count 2); and conspiracy to use
   and carry a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence under 18
   U.S.C. § 924(o) (Count 3). The district court sentenced Wix to concurrent
   sentences of 95 months’ imprisonment on Counts 1 and 3; a consecutive 84
   months’ imprisonment on Count 2; and 5 years’ supervised release on
   Counts 1 and 2, coupled with a concurrent 3 years’ supervised release on
   Count 3. Wix’s supervised release conditions included drug testing and
   mental health treatment as directed by his probation officer. Wix’s term of
   supervised release began on June 30, 2021.
          In November 2022, the Government filed an Amended Rule to
   Revoke Supervised Release. The Government contended that Wix’s mental
   health began to deteriorate by September 2022, and that he was no longer
   complying with mental health treatment or random drug testing. The district
   court set a December 2022 hearing where it heard testimony of U.S.
   Probation Officer Tiresha Fairley. Appellant testified on his own behalf.
   During the revocation hearing, the Government, Wix’s standby counsel, and
   the district court judge agreed that Wix needed a psychiatric evaluation. The
   only person who disagreed with this assessment was Wix. At the conclusion
   of the proceedings, the district court revoked Wix’s release and remanded
   him to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons with specific instructions that he
   receive mental health treatment.
                                    Discussion
          Under 18 U.S.C. § 4241, a district court

                                             2
Case: 22-30795      Document: 00516800147          Page: 3    Date Filed: 06/26/2023

                                    No. 22-30795

                 shall order [a competency] hearing on its own
                 motion, if there is reasonable cause to believe
                 that the defendant may presently be suffering
                 from a mental disease or defect rendering him
                 mentally incompetent to the extent that he is
                 unable to understand the nature and
                 consequences of the proceedings against him or
                 to assist properly in his defense.
   See also United States v. Davis, 61 F.3d 291, 304 (5th Cir. 1995). Section 4241
   has been applied to revocation hearings. See e.g., United States v. Blake, 606
   F. App’x 243–244 (5th Cir. 2015) (unpublished) (per curiam). This court
   reviews for abuse of discretion whether a district court erred in failing to sua
   sponte order a competency hearing. Id. (citing Davis, 61 F.3d at 303).
          “The record contains evidence that would have given the district
   court reasonable cause to believe that [Wix] might be unable to meet the
   standard of competence to proceed with the revocation proceeding.” Id. at
   244. During the hearing, the district court concluded that “[a]ll of us agree,
   except perhaps Mr. Wix, that he really does need a psychiatric evaluation.”
   The district court then acknowledged that Wix had been diagnosed with
   schizophrenia and paranoid delusions. The district court stated that “[i]t
   seems to be a—and it’s not the fault of anybody here, the Government,
   Probation, Defense, that we have, I’ll say a gap in the law, of uncertainty here
   on—because obviously his doctor says that he needs psychiatric evaluation,
   okay.” Based on the facts and circumstances noted by the district court, a
   competency hearing was required under § 4241.
                                    Conclusion
          The revocation sentence is VACATED. This case is REMANDED
   to the district court with instructions to hold a competency hearing under 18
   § 4241.

                                              3