Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Bill Edward Sturgis v. Robert Goldsmith

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 11, 1986No. 83-2281Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWallace, Circuit Judge

I concur in the majority’s opinion except for Part C, in which the majority holds that a defendant is entitled to be present at a hearing on his competency to stand trial. From that holding, I dissent.

Whether due process and the sixth amendment grant a defendant the right to be present at a competency hearing is an open question in this circuit. Few courts have yet faced this issue. The one court that has thoroughly addressed the issue has held that the defendant’s absence at such a hearing presents no constitutional deprivation. See United States v. Makris, 398 F.Supp. 507, 509-11…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Pate v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  5. Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API