Refining and Applying the Competence to Stand Trial Standard

2019 ◽  
pp. 100-126
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Hafemeister
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
Pivotal Role ◽  
Competence To Stand Trial ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Basic Approach ◽  
Criminal Defendant ◽  
Alternative Approaches ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
The U.S

Despite being a foundation of American jurisprudence, the CST doctrine (unlike the insanity defense) has receiving surprisingly little attention. Nevertheless, the CST of a criminal defendant is often questioned and evaluated, with forensic mental health examinations playing a pivotal role in these determinations. Chapter 4 further delineates the foundations of the CST doctrine, refinements to the basic approach identified by the USSC as mandated by the U.S. Constitution, key aspects of these determinations, factors to be examined in these assessments, some criticisms of the existing CST doctrine, and possible alternative approaches.

Forcing the Insanity Defense on Unwilling Defendants: Best Interests and the Dignity of the Law

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 487-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert D. Miller ◽  
Jonathan Olin ◽  
David Johnson ◽  
John Doidge ◽  
David Iverson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Policy Preference ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Criminal Defendant ◽  
The Law ◽  
Attorneys General

Although the choice of which plea to enter is reserved, under common law and most statutory law, to a criminal defendant, 17 of the 48 jurisdictions that retained the insanity defense at the time of this study permit that defense to be imposed over the objections of defendants. The authors present the results of a survey of the literature, statutes, and case law that deal with forced insanity defenses, as well as a national survey of attorneys general and state forensic mental health forensic program directors, which indicate that over a third of jurisdictions permit the imposition of the insanity defense on unwilling defendants. They also present the results of a detailed survey of 50 consecutive defendants evaluated for sanity in Colorado. While respondents from the jurisdictions (including Colorado) that permit forced insanity defenses estimate that such imposition is very rare, the results from the Colorado survey indicate that, at least in that state, it represents 32% of insanity defenses initially entered. The major reason for permitting such imposed defenses is a policy preference for preserving the dignity of the law over the rights of individual competent defendants. The authors discuss the implications of that position for forensic evaluators.

Unqualified Acquittal versus Insanity: Mental Disorder as an Evidentiary Issue, Not an Affirmative Defense

2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-75
Author(s):  
David L. Goldberg
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Criminal Defendant ◽  
Criminal Defense ◽  
Affirmative Defense

Although the insanity defense has been present in our criminal justice system for centuries, this paper discusses the utility of the defense as compared with that of an evidentiary attack on the mental elements of the crime itself. By reviewing insanity acquittal data and analyzing the substantive insanity defense and rules of evidence along with the progeny case law, we conclude that the insanity defense does not always provide the greater criminal defense option when mental health is in issue. There exists what this article refers to as “element negation,” which enables a criminal defendant to achieve complete acquittal based on a lack of the requisite mens rea in any charged crime. Because element negation is a viable defense to any crime, and it encompasses any evidence that would be used to proffer an insanity argument, mental disorder as evidence can be governed by the rules of criminal procedure and evidence, which may render the affirmative insanity defense a less appealing option.

Competence to stand trial and criminalization: an overview of the research

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-172
Author(s):  
Amanda Beltrani ◽  
Patricia A. Zapf
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Steady Increase ◽  
Competence To Stand Trial ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Systems ◽  
National Organizations ◽  
Psychiatric Beds

Beginning in the 1960s, a steady decline in the number of inpatient psychiatric beds has occurred across the United States, primarily as a result of stricter civil commitment criteria and a societal movement toward deinstitutionalization. Concomitant with this decrease in psychiatric beds has been a steady increase in the number of mentally ill individuals who are arrested and processed through the criminal justice system as defendants. One consequence of this has been an explosion in the number of defendants referred for evaluations of their present mental state—adjudicative competence—and subsequently found incompetent and ordered to complete a period of competency restoration. This has resulted in forensic mental health systems that are overwhelmed by the demand for services and that are unable to meet the needs of these defendants in a timely manner. In many states, lawsuits have been brought by defendants who have had their liberties restricted as a result of lengthy confinements in jail awaiting forensic services. The stress on state-wide forensic systems has become so widespread that this has reached the level of a near-national crisis. Many states and national organizations are currently attempting to study these issues and develop creative strategies for relieving this overburdening of forensic mental health systems nationwide. The purpose of this article is to review the current state of the research on competence to stand trial and to highlight those issues that might be relevant to the issue of criminalization of individuals with mental illness in the United States.

Procedural Aspects of Insanity Defense Determinations

2019 ◽  
pp. 269-285
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Hafemeister
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Common Features

Chapter 10 addresses the trial-related procedures used to evaluate an insanity defense, with the USSC generally having left it to the states to decide for themselves what procedures to employ. Although they often share some common features, the states have also adopted—like the numerous variations in their insanity tests—different procedures for generating related forensic mental health evaluations, reflecting the widespread uncertainty and disagreement over how to handle these cases. This chapter describes some of these procedures and the controversies associated with them.

Dispositions Following a Successful Insanity Defense and Risk Assessments

2019 ◽  
pp. 286-311
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Hafemeister
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
The State ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Forensic Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Setting ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Post Trial

Chapter 11 considers the dispositions and management of defendants who have been found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). A common misperception is that defendants found NGRI are released back into the community upon completion of the trial. The reality is that they are typically placed in a secure psychiatric setting where they will not be released until deemed non-dangerous by a presiding judge, which may result in them spending more time in the custody of the state than if they had been convicted of the crime with which they were charged. This chapter explores the dispositions of NGRI acquittees, the nature of these dispositions, the post-trial evaluations and judicial proceedings they must undergo to obtain release, bases for revoking authorized releases, and associated forensic mental health evaluations, risk assessments, and commonly identified risk factors.

Effects of Exposure to News of the U.S. War in Iraq on Iraqi Refugees' Health and Mental Health

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ibrahim A. Kira ◽  
Linda Lewandowski ◽  
Thom Templin ◽  
Hammad Adnan ◽  
Jamal Mohanesh
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Iraqi Refugees ◽  
War In Iraq ◽  
The U.S
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document