When there has not been a psychiatric evaluation, hearing or judicial determination of competence, when there has been no evidentiary review of the record, what is the test for determining whether defendant Lowenstein is competent to stand trial?

When, as in this case, there has not been a psychiatric evaluation, hearing, or judicial determination of competence, we conduct a "comprehensive" review of the record. De Kaplany v. Enomoto, 540 F.2d 975, 983 (9th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1075 (1977). Our comprehensive review is "not limited by either the abuse of discretion or clearly erroneous standard." Id. The question we ask in our comprehensive review is "whether a reasonable judge, situated as was the trial court judge whose failure to conduct an evidentiary hearing is being reviewed, should have experienced doubt with respect to [Lowenstein's] competency to stand trial." Id.