RICHARD C. MARTIN, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a factual determination of the appellant's mental competence at the time of the offenses and trial is required.
Appellant pleaded guilty to armed robbery and was sentenced. He later filed a motion to vacate, alleging mental incompetence at the time of the offens…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mental Incompetence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant was charged by an eight-count indictment with the commission of various offenses, all of which stem directly or indirectly from the armed robbery of the First National Bank of Jacksonville, Alabama. Upon entry of a plea of guilty, he was sentenced to thirty years imprisonment by the District Court for the Northern District of Alabama on October 31, 1955. A motion to vacate the conviction and sentence pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was denied by the sentencing court on May 20, 1966.
Appellant contends he was mentally incompetent at the time of his trial and when the offenses were committed. In considering these arguments, the District Court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing, but relied instead upon various medical and psychiatric reports from the Bureau of Prisons.
Appellee admits factual issues were properly before the District Court and suggests that this matter be returned for a hearing on the questions of appellant’s competence at the time of the trial and when the offenses were committed. Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is reversed and the cause is remanded for a factual determination, after hearing, of the questions outlined herein.