Appeals court orders review in death penalty case

— The life of a man convicted of kidnapping, torture and murder might be spared after an appeals court has ruled that Joseph Edward Duncan III should have been given a competency hearing before he was allowed to waive his appeal.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded Duncan's case Monday, ordering U.S. District Court Judge Edward Lodge to hold a retrospective competency hearing for Duncan.

If Duncan is found to be incompetent on the matter of waiving his right to an appeal, Lodge must hold an additional hearing to determine whether the death row inmate was competent to represent himself. If he's not, Lodge must vacate the death sentence.

In a prepared statement, U.S. Attorney Wendy Olson said that since his arrest in 2005, Duncan has been found competent by every court that has considered the issue, and that his three death sentences remain in place. She said the competency hearing was simply a procedural matter.


At his federal trial in Boise, Duncan decided to represent himself even though the court had provided him with three defense attorneys. The court-appointed attorneys were put on "standby" status, ordered to help him when he asks, but otherwise allow Duncan to handle his own defense.

The attorneys challenged whether Duncan was competent to represent himself, but the district court rejected their challenge and decided not to hold a hearing on the matter. After Duncan was sentenced to death and waived his right to an appeal, his standby attorneys again challenged whether he was competent to make that decision. Again, Lodge found that he was and didn't hold a hearing on the matter.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Lodge should have held a hearing to determine Duncan's competency. The appellate judges noted that although he frequently appeared rational in court, Duncan had unusual religious beliefs that played a significant role in how he conducted his defense. And while two experts appointed by the lower federal court found that Duncan was competent to stand trial, the appellate court noted that some experts contacted by the standby attorneys found that Duncan was delusional and psychotic.

"We must decide whether the evidence established `reasonable cause' to believe that Defendant lacked the competence required to represent himself and to waive his right to an appeal," Judge Suan Graber wrote on behalf of herself and judges Raymond Fisher and Milan Smith Jr. "We think it did, and thus, that the district court erred when it concluded otherwise."

During the sentencing hearing, Lodge did make an effort to determine if Duncan was competent. He ordered Duncan to be examined by a local psychologist, who said that while Duncan's thoughts were "somewhat unusual," Duncan wasn't delusional and that he'd waived his right to an attorney knowingly and voluntarily. Lodge went on to have Duncan evaluated again, this time by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. For that evaluation, a forensic psychologist watched Duncan over a period of six weeks, reviewed his mental and medical health records and spoke to his attorneys. Duncan refused to participate in the evaluations.


