Insanity

Question 1

True or false: the criminal trial of an incompetent defendant violates the Due Process Clause of the Constitution

Answer 1

True

Question 2

A person is incompetent if, during the criminal proceedings, she:

Answer 2

1) lacks capacity to consult with her attorney “with a reasonable degree of rational understanding”
2) lacks a “rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings” against her

Question 3

Incompetency may be the result of…

Answer 3

A physical handicap (e.g., inability to speak)

A temporary or permanent disability (e.g., mental illness, mental disability, or amnesia)

Question 4

Justifications for punishment and insanity

Answer 4

Retribution and individual deterrence may be frustrated if an incompetent defendant does not understand the nature of the proceedings against her

Question 5

Who may raise the issue of competency (procedurally speaking)?

Answer 5

Issue of competency to stand trial may be raised by the prosecutor, the defense, or by the trial judge on her own motion, and is independent of any insanity plea that the defendant might later raise

Question 6

Is competency an issue of law or fact?

Answer 6

Issue of law to be determined by the trial judge

Question 7

Whenever the issue of competency is raised, the defendant is required to submit to…

Answer 7

A psychiatric evaluation during which time she may be committed to a mental facility

If the findings of the report are not disputed by the parties, the judge may act on it; if they are disputed, a hearing is held at which the parties may present evidence on the matter of competency

Question 8

Effect of an incompetency finding

Answer 8

If D is determined to be incompetent to stand trial, proceedings must be suspended until she is competent. It is possible a criminal trial might never be held.

Question 9

A verdict of NGRI implies…

Answer 9

Prosecution proved all of the elements of the crime, including the defendant’s mens rea, beyond a reasonable doubt, and that all of the defendant’s non-insanity defenses were rejected, but that the jury determined, after considering expert and lay testimony, that the accused was insane at the time of the crime

Logically, a jury should consider an NG verdict first since to do otherwise would result in civil commitment without determining whether the prosecution has proven every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Question 10

Insanity: burden of proof

Answer 10

Insanity is an affirmative defense. D is presumed to be sane.