Criminal – Competence

Where a defendant has been found not competent to stand trial because he suffers from severe and permanent mental impairments, the criminal charges against him should be dismissed without prejudice because there is essentially no chance that he could become competent in the foreseeable future or at any time before the charges would have to be dismissed by law.

“The Commonwealth alleges that Jose Rosado-Nazario threatened to shoot someone that he knew and to damage the car that they were driving, threw a brick that damaged the car, and brandished a firearm toward that person and their companion. Mr. Rosado-Nazario has been indicted for two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon as well as unlawful possession of a firearm (second offense) and ammunition, possession of a firearm while committing a felony (which is a life felony), and malicious damage to a motor vehicle. The firearm and ammunition charges are accompanied by indictments alleging that Mr. Rosado-Nazario is subject to enhanced penalties as an armed career criminal with convictions for two serious drug offenses on his record.

“The Court recently found, after an evidentiary hearing, that Mr. Rosado-Nazario is not competent to stand trial because he suffers from severe and permanent mental impairments that prevent him from understanding the proceeding against him, consulting meaningfully with his lawyer, or helping to prepare or making decisions about his defense.

“The Court also found that Rosado-Nazario’s cognitive limitations appear to be permanent, his intellectual function is not likely to improve with any kind of treatment, and it is therefore very unlikely he will ever be competent to stand trial. As the Court explained in its prior ruling, Rosado-Nazario has not been competent to stand trial since at least 2018 and probably much earlier.

“Based on the Court’s recent findings, Defense counsel has asked the Court to dismiss the charges in this case in the interest of justice because Mr. Rosado Nazario is unlikely ever to become competent.

“For the reasons discussed below, the Court will exercise its discretion under G.L.c. 123, §16(f), to dismiss the charges in this case, without prejudice, in the interest of justice. …

“The Court will exercise its discretion to allow the motion by Mr. Rosado-Nazario seeking dismissal of the charges against him, as permitted by statute, because there is essentially no chance that Mr. Rosado-Nazario could become competent in the foreseeable future, or at any time before the charges in this case would have to be dismissed by law.

“It concludes that the pending indictments should therefore be dismissed without prejudice in the interest of justice pursuant to G.L.c. 123, §16(f).”

Commonwealth v. Rosado-Nazario (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-052-24) (8 pages) (Salinger, J.) (Middlesex Superior Court) (Docket No. 2081CR00319) (Nov. 25, 2024).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.