In reviewing whether a state trial judge should have sua sponte conducted a competency hearing, can a federal court consider only the evidence that was before the trial judge?

In reviewing whether a state trial judge should have sua sponte conducted a competency hearing, a federal court may consider only the evidence that was before the trial judge. United States v. Lewis, 991 F.2d 524, 527 (9th Cir. 1993). Whether a defendant is capable of understanding the proceedings and assisting counsel depends on "evidence of the defendant's irrational behavior, his demeanor in court, and any prior medical opinions on competence to stand trial." Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162, 180 (1975). None of these factors is determinative, but any one of them may be sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt regarding competence. Id.

In addition, although the opinion of the defendant's counsel certainly is not determinative, the defendant's counsel is in the best position to evaluate a client's comprehension of the proceedings. See, e.g., Hernandez v. Ylst, 930 F.2d 714, 718 (9th Cir. 1991) ("We deem significant the fact that the trial judge, government counsel, and [the petitioner's] own attorney

Page 203