United States v. Kimble

Facts

It is not a question that defendant suffers from mild to moderate mental retardation. His IQ is below average and he answers the questions consistent with an early grade-school child. Defendant started special education in first grade, and although he did not drop out of school until he was 20 years-old, he did not obtain a 6th grade reading level. He was in a serious car accident in 2001 that caused his physical and cognitive disabilities.

Two separate expert opinions were obtained. The first from Dr. Seiden found that the defendant was not competent to stand trial because he did not understand what the right to remain silent meant, he did not understand why he would want an attorney, and thought that if he did not answer questions he would be arrested. Though, he found that some of this could be remedied with education, his cognitive impairments and lack of concentration made him incompetent to stand trial. The second opinion was from Dr. Ahava who found that with five accommodations the defendant could stand trial. Those accommodations were: 1) shorter court hearings, 2) Defendant must get all pain medications by a single primary care physician, 3) require defendant to take his medication during intervals in the proceeding, 4) require all communications between the court and defendant be in the simplest language possible, and 5) require the defendant in his own words to repeat back essential communications.