Gerardo Solis III v. The State of Texas

Summary

The Thirteenth Court of Appeals of Texas held that the record contained some evidence that Gerardo Solis III may have been incompetent to proceed in revocation proceedings. The trial court improperly weighed evidence suggesting competency against evidence suggesting incompetency and therefore abused its discretion by failing to order a formal competency examination. The court abated the appeals and remanded for a determination of whether a retrospective competency proceeding was feasible.

Holdings

1. The record contained some evidence that Solis may have been incompetent to stand trial or proceed at the revocation hearing because he may have lacked a rational ability to consult with counsel or understand the proceedings.
2. The trial court abused its discretion by weighing evidence suggesting competency against evidence suggesting incompetency during the informal inquiry.
3. The proper remedy was to abate the appeals and remand the cases for the trial court to determine whether a retrospective competency examination and trial were feasible.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to order a psychological competency examination after the record contained some evidence that Solis may have been incompetent to proceed at the community-supervision revocation hearing.
2. Whether the appeals should be abated and remanded for a retrospective competency determination.

Disposition

other