California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from In re Corpus, C083826 (Cal. App. 2018):
A defendant is not competent to stand trial or to enter a plea if the defendant lacks " ' "sufficient present ability to consult with [a] lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding" ' " and " ' "a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him." ' " (Drope v. Missouri (1975) 420 U.S. 162, 172 [43 L.Ed.2d 103, 113].) There are two types of incompetency claims that typically arise following a defendant's conviction. The first type of claim, which is often the subject of a direct appeal, is that there was reason for the trial court to doubt whether the defendant was competent during the proceedings and, consequently, the court should have suspended the proceedings until the issue was determined. (See 1368.) This claim is sometimes called a claim of "procedural" incompetence.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.