Order — United States v. Shawn Michael Simmerer (Middle District of Florida, Document 109)

Summary

An Order of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, in United States v. Shawn Michael Simmerer, concerning Defendant's mental competency. It states that after a Competency Hearing on December 12, 2024, Magistrate Judge Robert M. Norway entered a Report and Recommendation that the Court find Defendant competent to proceed, and that the parties did not object. The Court adopts and confirms the R&R and finds Defendant competent to proceed. It also denies as moot Defendant's pro se motion in light of the appointment of Attorney Andrew C. Searle. The order is dated January 6, 2025.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN     Document 109     Filed 01/07/25   Page 1 of 2 PageID 286




                       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                        MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
                            ORLANDO DIVISION

  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

  v.                                                 Case No. 6:24-cr-53-RBD-RMN

  SHAWN MICHAEL SIMMERER.
  ____________________________________

                                       ORDER

        Before the Court is the issue of Defendant’s mental competency. Defendant

  moved for a psychiatric evaluation in October 2024. (Doc. 70.) Around the same

  time, Defendant’s attorney, Charles Greene, moved to withdraw (Docs. 69, 93),

  and Defendant improperly filed a pro se motion seeking a new attorney, or if none

  could be appointed, self-representation (Doc. 76). On referral, U.S. Magistrate

  Judge Robert M. Norway granted Defendant’s motion for a psychiatric evaluation

  and appointed an expert who conducted the evaluation. (Docs. 82, 85, 90.) The

  Court took Defendant’s pro se motion under advisement pending the outcome of

  the competency proceedings. (Doc. 79.)

        Judge Norway then held a Competency Hearing on December 12, 2024, and

  entered a Report and Recommendation stating that the Court should find

  Defendant competent to proceed. (Doc. 105 (“R&R”).) During that hearing, Judge

  Norway granted Attorney Greene’s motion to withdraw, appointed new counsel,

  and denied Defendant’s pro se motion as moot. (Docs. 101, 103, 104.) As to the R&R,
Case 6:24-cr-00053-RBD-RMN           Document 109          Filed 01/07/25    Page 2 of 2 PageID 287




  the parties did not object and the time has passed, so the Court examines the R&R

  for clear error only. See Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).

  Finding none, the R&R is due to be adopted.

          Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

          1.     The R&R (Doc. 105) is ADOPTED AND CONFIRMED and made a

                 part of this Order in its entirety.

          2.     The Defendant is FOUND COMPETENT TO PROCEED.

          3.     Now that the competency issue has been resolved, the Court

                 DENIES AS MOOT Defendant’s pro se motion (Doc. 76) in light of

                 the appointment of Attorney Andrew C. Searle. 1

          DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on January 6,

  2025.




          1 To the extent Defendant still wishes to raise the issue of self-representation, Defendant

  may raise it in a new filing through his new attorney.

                                                      2


File and source

File

109.pdf

Size

269,017 bytes

SHA-256

e0925c6adfb22761fcf5d00849c05a9dfb1349da7f6134ba8ebd3a2246c5e3e4

Our copy

109.pdf

Original

No public link identified.