An unvacated adjudication of incompetency requires a burden shift to the state to prove that the def is competent.

Does anybody have a cite handy to support the notion that the above principle (Manning, Bradford, et al) applies only to the instant case? That is, if such a determination exists and a def is later charged with another offense, subsequent to the determination discussed, would the burden shift then as well in that new case? I would like to argue "no." But perhaps I'm wrong..

[This message was edited by Floyd L. Jennings on 06-25-08 at .]

did you ever get an answer to this? We have this situation now and I can't find anything on subsequent offenses.