United States v. Arenburg

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that district courts have an obligation to revisit a defendant’s competency if there is reasonable cause to do so
• explaining that a competency evaluation is appropriate only if “reasonable cause” exists to believe the defendant may be incompetent
• remanding for a determination of whether there is sufficient information to allow a meaningful retroactive competency hearing
• remanding case for competency examination where defendant had been previously diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia
• noting disfavor of nunc pro tunc determination in context of competency for self-representation
• reasonable cause to reconsider defendant‟s competency where “he made repeated references to „radio waves,‟ 15 11-5462-cr(L); 10-3393-cr(con

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).