United States District Court, D. Minnesota
M. Hollenhorst, Esq., United States Attorney's Office,
Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Plaintiff.
S. Kushner, Esq., Law Office of Jordan S. Kushner,
Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Defendant
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MONTGOMERY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the undersigned United States District Judge
for a ruling on Defendant Malcolm Roy Evans'
(“Evans”) Motion to Terminate AG Custody [Docket
No. 128] and Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 129]. The
Government has filed a Response [Docket No. 133]. For the
reasons set forth below, the Motions are denied.
18, 2015, after a four-day trial, a jury found Evans guilty
of offenses stemming from armed bank robbery and carjacking,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a), 2113(d),
2119(1), and 2113(e). See Min. Entry [Docket No.
70]. Evans was scheduled to be sentenced on January 26, 2017.
See [Docket No. 107]. On January 18, 2017, Evans
filed a Motion for Order of Competency to Stand Trial [Docket
No. 118], requesting a psychiatric or psychological
evaluation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241(b). That request
was granted, and Evans was ordered to be transported by the
United States Marshal Service to a Bureau of Prisons facility
and committed to the custody of the Attorney General.
See Order [Docket No. 119]. The January 26, 2017
sentencing hearing was cancelled. See [Docket No.
120]. The day after requesting the evaluation, Evans filed a
Motion to Cancel the Competency Evaluation [Docket No. 121].
That motion was denied and the Order of January 26 remained
in effect. See Order [Docket No. 124].
February 2, 2017, Evans was transported to the Metropolitan
Detention Center in Los Angles, California for the
evaluation. In a March 3, 2017 letter, the Warden of the
Metropolitan Detention Center requested a 15-day extension to
complete the examination. That request was granted.
See Order [Docket No. 131].
now argues that he should be released from the Attorney
General's custody and transported back to Minnesota to
receive a competency evaluation from a psychologist or
psychiatrist of his choice. Evans also argues that his due
process rights have been violated by the length of time
between his trial and sentencing. Evans requests that the
charges against him be dismissed.
Motion to Terminate Custody
first argues that the Attorney General has failed to arrange
for a timely competency evaluation, and he should therefore
be permitted to make arrangements to have the evaluation
performed by a psychologist of his choosing. This argument
has no merit. Evans, who was committed to the custody of the
Attorney General for a 30 day period, arrived at the
Metropolitan Detention Center on February 2, 2017. In a March
3, 2017 letter, the Warden of that facility requested a
15-day extension to complete the evaluation. Under 18 U.S.C.
§ 4241(d)(1), the Attorney General is permitted to
maintain custody of a defendant for a “reasonable
period of time, not to exceed four months.” The time
Evans has been in the custody of the Attorney General is
Motion to Dismiss
next argues that the delay between verdict and sentencing has
violated his due process rights under the Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendments, and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
32(b)(1). Evans argues that because of this delay, he has
been prejudiced by being confined in a county jail setting
that is more restrictive than a federal prison, which ...