In United States v. Telles, --- F.4th ---, No. 19-10218 (9th Cir. 2021), the Court affirmed convictions and the sentence for online enticement of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b), and engaging in illicit conduct in foreign places in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c).
Throughout the proceedings, defense counsel made six motions for a competency evaluation. The district court denied them all, concluding Telles was malingering. The Ninth affirmed: “[A] reasonable judge, faced with this record, would not have found it necessary to doubt [Telles’s] competency.”
This case is a good reminder that, to get a competency evaluation under 18 U.S.C. § 4241, it is critical to show not only a mental-health issue, but also a direct connection between that issue and the client's ability to understand or assist. As the Ninth Circuit put it, “[e]ven a mentally deranged defendant is out of luck if there is no indication that he failed to understand or assist in his criminal proceedings.”
The Court also affirmed the district court’s exclusion of Telles' proposed expert testimony: "The district court 'warned Mr. Telles that he risked forfeiting the opportunity to present his own expert or to present a mental disease or defect defense if he did not cooperate with the government’s expert.' Yet Telles proceeded to do exactly that."
Finally, the Court also affirmed the district court in: (1) denying Telles' motion to represent himself, (2) allowing the government to present expert testimony on the typical behaviors of sex offenders of child victims, and (3) imposing a sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.5(b)(1) for engaging in a pattern of activity involving prohibited sexual conduct.
