It is common practice that when the issue of competency is raised, a forensic evaluation is subsequently conducted. This lack of insight can have a significant impact on the defendant's ability to make legal strategy decisions that rely on their acceptance of their mental illness. In the end, the prosecution offered a life sentence without parole, and he accepted the plea bargain. Permitted comparison of mitigating and aggravating factors to decide death penalty decisions. It has been found that forensic evaluators in the community tend to give inadequate consideration to decisional competence.24 Thus, defendants such as those discussed herein may be found competent to stand trial or restored to competency despite having inadequate decisional competence. There are valid reasons that a defendant would refuse to use an insanity defense. 4, p 402). She appealed the court's ruling in light of North Carolina v. Alford14 (holding that it is constitutional for the court to accept a guilty plea despite the defendant's disavowal of guilt) and Faretta v. California15 (ruling that it is constitutional for a defendant to represent himself). How do the delusions and lack of insight affect the defendant's judgment? See Commonwealth v. Companonio, 445 Mass. Home » Case Summaries » Competency: No violation of due process in conducting TPR trial against incompetent parent. http://supreme-court-cases.insidegov.com/l/4137/Proffitt-v-Florida, Capital Punishment: Legal Aspects - Early Constitutional Intervention, Participation of medical professionals in American executions, Lists of United States Supreme Court cases, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_involving_mental_health&oldid=992023201, Lists of United States Supreme Court opinions by topic, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. From a societal standpoint, competency standards protect the accuracy and reliability of the court proceeding. CRIMINAL-Prisoners have only a very limited right to refuse psychotropic medications in prison. It must be kept in mind, though, that many individuals who are ideologically or politically motivated who commit violent acts in the name of their ideology or cause are not severely mentally ill27 and thus may be both competent and sane. Respecting the autonomy of a competent defendant in legal decision-making is in accord with other areas of criminal law that give deference to the defendant's decisions. 11, p 297). Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address. However, there must be a formal institutional hearing, the prisoner must be found to be dangerous to himself or others, the prisoner must be diagnosed with a serious mental illness, and the mental health care professional must state that the medication prescribed is in the prisoner's best interest. Competency will be decided at a hearing on the defendant’s fitness to stand trial. Competency to Stand Trial and Defendants Who Lack Insight Into Their Mental Illness, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online. There must be some possibility of becoming competent in a reasonable amount of time. It made the Durham test of insanity standard for federal cases. Established that prisoners are entitled to a minimum level of treatment. Criminal Attorney discusses Competency to Proceed in Criminal Cases and the difficulty encountered by the court, the defendant,their families and the attorneys. That violated the defendant's right against self incrimination. We argue that evaluating a defendant's insight into his mental illness is an important aspect of a competency evaluation. Forensic evaluators often assess patients who lack insight into their mental illnesses. Facts of the Case. Copyright © 2020 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. The U.S. Supreme Court has issued numerous rulings regarding mental health and how society treats and regards the mentally ill. 3, p 144]. For example, Colorado, having ruled on the issue several times in the past, again addressed it in Hendricks v. People.16 In Hendricks, the trial court concluded that Ms. Hendricks was competent and declined to enter an insanity defense over the defendant's objection. Strong paranoid delusions, almost by definition, suggest that the defendant does not have the insight to recognize that the delusion is a sign of mental illness. In People v. Morton,21 “The New York appellate court ruled that such a defendant is competent to stand trial and that an insanity defense should not be imposed” (Ref 3, p 138, emphasis in original, referring to Ref. Preventing the execution [capital punishment] of the insane, requiring an evaluation of competency and an evidentiary hearing, Competency to stand trial includes the abilities to plead guilty and to waive the right to counsel, In a ruling that followed Wainright (in assessing the nature of cruel and unusual punishments), children may not be given the death penalty, Likewise, children may not be given life sentences (without possibility of parole) for offenses that do not include murder. The assessment may necessitate obtaining collateral information from the defendant's attorney or reviewing records. The defendant refuses an insanity defense against the advice of counsel. They can consider the defendant’s ability to understand … Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas. Div. These criteria are consistent with the Dusky4 requirement that to be competent to stand trial, the defendant must be able to “consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding” (Ref. The topic is relevant to this article because rational decision-making becomes paramount when assessing a defendant who lacks insight into his mental illness and who faces decisions that bear on the fact that he is mentally ill. One possible reason for a defendant's refusal of the insanity plea is that he lacks insight into his mental illness. In June 2016, Dr. Henkel-Johnson testified regarding Curtis’s competency to stand trial in an unrelated case and provided the opinion that Curtis was incompetent. In the 1986 case of Ford v. Wainright, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute someone who does not understand why he is being put to death. The man accused of gunning down U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killing six is mentally incompetent to stand trial, a judge rules. In addition, some defendants are not willing to admit that they committed the act in question, a presupposition to the insanity defense.25 If the state has only equivocal evidence, it may be prudent to decline an insanity defense.