United States v. Luis Martinez Franco , 569 F. App'x 535 ( 2014 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 15 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-30011
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00045-JLQ-3
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LUIS ALBERTO MARTINEZ
FRANCO, AKA Jose Luis Galicias-
Camacho, AKA Luis,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Justin L. Quackenbush, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 10, 2014**
Seattle, Washington
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
While Franco’s conduct at his sentencing hearing was perhaps strange,
“unusual behavior alone [is] insufficient to create a genuine doubt as to his
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
page 2
competency.” United States v. Dreyer, 705 F.3d 951, 963 (9th Cir. 2013). As the
trial judge—who’d monitored Franco’s conduct over the course of eight months
and two trials—noted, Franco’s behavior at the hearing was more likely indicative
of recalcitrance than a failure to understand the proceedings. This finding is
particularly rational given the complete lack of medical evidence suggesting
Franco’s incompetence, and the fact that “[d]efense counsel ha[d] not . . . raised the
issue of Defendant’s competency prior to the concluding portion of the sentencing
proceeding.” Under these circumstances, Franco’s strange remarks and behavior at
sentencing are best understood as a “reasoned choice,” id., and don’t constitute
“substantial evidence casting doubt upon his competency.” Moore v. United
States, 464 F.2d 663, 666 (9th Cir. 1972) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.