In United States v. Quintero, --- F.3d ---, No. 19-10300 (9th Cir. 2021), the Court affirmed the district court’s order committing Sonia Quintero, who was found incompetent to stand trial on federal drug charges, to the custody of the Attorney General pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d) for inpatient assessment of her potential for restoration to competency.
Quintero argued that the district court should have ordered evaluation and treatment in an outpatient facility and that her commitment violates her statutory and constitutional rights. She raised seven distinct challenges to her mandatory inpatient commitment under § 4241(d). She argued: (1) § 4241(d) grants the district court discretion to order a specific form of treatment, and the policies of the Attorney General and Bureau of Prisons (BOP) violate the Constitution; mandatory commitment violates (2) due process,(3) equal protection, (4) fundamental fairness, (5) the Sixth Amendment, and (6) the Eighth Amendment; and (7) mandatory commitment discriminates on the basis of disability in violation of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act
The Court rejected all of these claims and held that § 4241(d) mandates that district courts commit mentally incompetent defendants to the custody of the Attorney General for treatment, without discretion for the court to order a particular treatment.
Of note, the opinion contains helpful language on the liberty interest of pretrial defendants. For instance, "we recognize that a pretrial defendant has a significant liberty interest in avoiding pretrial confinement, including civil commitment."
