# United States v. Phillip E. Gutman

> Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 10, 1984 · 725 F.2d 417

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9471655

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Phillip E. GUTMAN, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- **Decided:** May 10, 1984
- **Citations:** 725 F.2d 417
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Coffey
- **Judges:** Flaum, Posner, Coffey, Fairchild
- **Cited by:** 40 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9471655

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s refusal to hold a hearing to determine whether a witness with a history of mental illness was competent to testify
- concluding that a witness with “bouts of serious mental illness” was not necessarily “incapable of telling the truth”

## Opinion text

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
COFFEY, Circuit Judge, with whom FLAUM, Circuit Judge, joins.
With all due respect, I feel compelled to dissent to this court’s decision to deny rehearing. In addition to the views expressed in my dissent, I believe that this court’s reasoning in the recent United States v. Johns, 728 F.2d 953 (7th Cir.1984) decision warrants a rehearing in the instant case. In Johns , our court remanded to the district court for a determination of the defendant’s competency at the time of that court’s proceedings due to its original failure to order a psychiatric examination. In light of Johns , where the question of sanity was much less pronounced, I believe the somewhat inconsistent result in the present case necessitates a rehearing. For the record, I think it also should be noted that within two months of Gutman’s conviction, Odom was recommitted to a mental health facility by court order.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9471655. Public record. Not legal advice.