USA v. Steven Michael Marks
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Steven Michael Marks’s conviction for enticing a minor, rejecting his claim that the district court misallocated the burden of proof during competency hearings and erred in finding him competent. The Court held that even if the burden was improperly placed on the defendant, the evidence was not in equipoise and therefore the allocation was irrelevant; it also concluded that the district court did not clearly err in finding Marks competent under the Dusky standard.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Which party bears the burden of proof (and in what direction) in a federal competency hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 4241.
Circuit Positions
Defendant bears the burden to prove incompetency by a preponderance of the evidence under § 4241.
Government bears the burden to prove the defendant is competent by a preponderance of the evidence under § 4241.
Eleventh Circuit—burden allocation need not be resolved when evidence is not in equipoise; question left open.
Conflict Summary
Some circuits place the burden on the defendant to prove incompetency by a preponderance of the evidence, while others place the burden on the government to prove competency. The Eleventh Circuit in this opinion declined to choose either view, holding that the allocation of the burden is immaterial where the evidence is not in equipoise.