USA v. Mendoza

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JUAN ARTURO MENDOZA
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CASE NUMBER 1:25-CR-00040-MAC
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON
THE DEFENDANT’S COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the Local Rules for the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas, this criminal proceeding is before the undersigned United
States magistrate judge.
On September 16, 2025, the Defendant filed a motion seeking a psychiatric or
psychological exam to determine if the Defendant was suffering from a mental disease or defect
rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent he is unable to understand the nature and
consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his Defense. Doc. No. 13.
The court granted that motion on October 20, 2025. Doc. No. 14. The Defendant was
subsequently evaluated by Jaime Jauregui, Ph.D., Licensed Psychologist at the Federal
Correctional Institution in San Diego, California, and found competent.
Dr. Jauregui’s psychiatric report concludes that the Defendant does not appear to suffer
from a mental disease or defect rendering him unable to understand the nature and consequences
of the proceedings against him or to properly assist in his defense. Doc. No. 19, p. 12-13.
Case 1:25-cr-00040-MAC-ZJH Document 21 Filed 03/09/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
A competency hearing was conducted on March 5, 2026. At the hearing, the Defendant
appeared in court with his counsel, Gary Bonneaux. Neither the Government nor the defense
objected to the psychological report’s results and findings.
The undersigned concludes that the Defendant is able to understand the nature and
consequences of the proceedings against him and to assist properly in his defense. The
Defendant has a rational and factual understanding of the proceeding against him, and has
sufficient present ability to consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of rational
understanding. 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d); see also Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).
RECOMMENDATION
The court should find the Defendant competent to stand trial because he understands the
nature and consequences of the proceeding against him and is able to assist in his defense. See
18 U.S.C. § 4241. It is further recommended that the speedy trial time be excluded from
September 16, 2025 (the date the Defendant filed an Unopposed Motion for Psychiatric Exam),
until the date on which the District Judge signs the order adopting this report and
recommendation.
OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), each party to this action has the right to file
objections to this Report and Recommendation. Both parties verbally waived their right to
objection to this recommendation. Therefore, the court may act on this report and
recommendation immediately.
_________________________
Zack Hawthorn
United States Magistrate Judge
SIGNED this 9th day of March, 2026.
Case 1:25-cr-00040-MAC-ZJH Document 21 Filed 03/09/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>