Whether the Dusky standard for competency to stand trial requires a defendant to have a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against them

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. In Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960), this Court held that a defendant is competent to stand trial when he “has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding,” and when “he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.” Does the “rational understanding” component of the Dusky standard require that the defendant be capable of making rational decisions? II. Does a defendant have a rational understanding of the proceedings against him when his theory of the case results from a developmental disability and cannot negate the elements of the offense?