Free Memorandum - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

. · I1
D.Q.-c»X
JACK L. POTTS, lVI.D. _
GENERAL AND FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY . I
221 EAST INDIANOLA I
Pnorzivrx, ARIZONA 85012 .
602.274.5494
I
December 10, 2005
I
Honorable Neil V. Wake
United States District Court of Arizona
401 West Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2120
RE: Competency Evaluation
US. Dist. (Arizona) No. CR02-1 028-001-PHX-N VW
Bryan Leland Deal
Dear Judge Wake:
This is in reference to the above—named individual. On November 16,
2005, your Court ordered that I evaluate the competency of Mr. Deal. I had an
opportunity of seeing the defendant for this evaluation on November 29, 2005. At that
time he had been transported to the Federal Courthouse by the U.S. Marshals. He
apparently was detained at the CCA facility in Florence, Arizona.
When I saw Mr. Deal in an interview room, I informed him of the nature
of our conversation and the fact it would not be privileged. I informed him I would be
sending my report to your Court.
Prior to completing my report I had no collateral information provided by
any of the parties. However, I did have an opportunity of speaking with Assistant U.S.
Attorney, Mr. Drake, as well as Adult Probation Officer, Ms. Libby Simone. I also had
an opportunity of briefly talking with the transporting Marshals.
OPINIONS
Based primarily upon the history I obtained by talking with collateral
sources, it appears Mr. Deal does have a major mental illness. It is my opinion, although
slightly qualified, that the defendant is not competent to effectively assist his attomey in
his defense. His lack of competence is quite likely related to a major mental illness;
possibly that ofa Schizoaffective Disorder.
There is a reasonable likelihood that the defendant can be restored to
competence within a reasonable time. However, there may be other issues and
Case 2:02-cr-01028-NVW Document 153-2 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 2

i Honorable Neil V. Wake
Re: Bryan Leland Deal
December l0, 2005
Page 2 {
I
altemative ways of treating Mr. Deal. Those may include civil commitment pursuant to I
Title 36 in the State of Arizona.
FOUNDATION FOR OPINIONS
Mr, Deal, when initially seen, was being walked down the hall to the l
interview room. He did not talk with the officers. When he was seated in a secure I
position, I introduced myself and he shook my hand. However, he did not talk with me. l
He presented with good hygiene. He appeared to be alert and oriented. He had fair eye I
contact. However, he did not respond at all to any of my questions.
Besides being voluntarily mute, there were no obvious behavioral
abnormalities noted during my evaluation. The Marshals did mention that at one point
during the day he had urinated on the floor ofthe holding cell in which he was located.
DISCUSSION
It is my understanding that Mr. Deal has been recently determined
incompetent and sent to a federal facility for restoration. Furthermore, it is my
understanding that the defendant was treated with psychiatric medications. Currently he
is facing probation on what are relatively minor charges. There does not seem to be any
obvious secondary gain (a necessary component to make the diagnosis of Malingering)
for Mr. Deal to not cooperate. It is because of this, as well as his past history of
treatment, that I believe the defendant is quite likely not competent at the current time.
S UIVIMAR Y AND RE COMMENDA T I ON
I will attempt to work with defense counsel and the Adult Probation Office
in seeing if there are some altematives to incarceration within a federal facility. He quite
likely meets the criteria as Persistently or Acutely Disabled pursuant to Title 36. He
therefore could and should be psychiatrically committed in the State of Arizona, which
might be a much better altemative than sending him out of state for restoration and then
having him refuse treatment again once restored to competence.
If the Court h as any further q uestions r egarding this v ery b riefr eport, I
will remain available.
Respectfully,
Jack L. Potts, M.D.
JLP:nb
0
Case 2:02-cr-01028-NVW Document 153-2 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 2 of 2

Case 2:02-cr-01028-NVW

Document 153-2

Filed 11/26/2007

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:02-cr-01028-NVW

Document 153-2

Filed 11/26/2007

Page 2 of 2