No. 25-5014

Phillip R. Durachinsky v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2025-07-02
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: competency-hearing critical-stages defense-counsel due-process effective-advocacy sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Where defense counsel reasonably believes that their client may be incompetent, but the defendant disagrees, does the Sixth Amendment require a district court to appoint 'special counsel' to advocate for the defendant's position at any competency proceeding?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Where defense counsel reasonably believes that their client may be incompetent, but the defendant disagrees, does the Sixth Amendment require a district court to appoint “special counsel” to advocate for the defendant’s position at any competency proceeding? iii RELATED CASES Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 14(1)(b)(iii), Petitioner submits these cases which are directly related to this Petition: none

Docket Entries

2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-07-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-07-10
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-07-10
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-06-30

Attorneys

Phillip Durachinsky
Kevin Michael SchadOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Kevin Michael SchadOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
Moez Mansoor KabaHueston Hennigan LLP, Respondent