ABILITY OF THE MENTALLY RETARDED TO PLEAD GUILTY

• NCJ Number: 57448
• Journal: Arizona State Law Journal Volume: 1975 Issue: 4, Dated: (1975)
• Author(s): J D H HAYS; S A EHRLICH
• Date Published: 1975
• Length: 16 pages
• Corporate Author: Arizona State University
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

FACTORS BEHIND COURT DECISIONS TO LIMIT THE CAPACITY OF MENTALLY RETARDED DEFENDANTS IN MAKING COMPETENT GUILTY PLEAS ARE ADDRESSED.

Abstract

THE ARTICLE WAS PROMPTED BY A CASE BEFORE THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT THAT CLEARLY PRESENTED THE ISSUE CONCERNING THE ABILITY OF A MENTALLY RETARDED PERSON TO PLEAD GUILTY TO A CRIMINAL OFFENSE. THE DEFENDANT PLEADED GUILTY TO A CHARGE OF VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER, THEREBY AVOIDING A TRIAL FOR FIRST-DEGREE MURDER. HE THEN APPEALED AND ARGUED THAT THE COURT SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED HIS GUILTY PLEA IN VIEW OF HIS LIMITED MENTAL CAPACITY. THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT AFFIRMED THE CONVICTION. EITHER INTENT OR CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE IS AN ELEMENT OF EVERY CRIMINAL OFFENSE IN ARIZONA, BUT THE STATE HAS NO STATUTORY DEFINITION OF MENTAL RETARDATION. THE RESULTS OF A QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO 58 PSYCHIATRISTS IN THE PHOENIX METROPOLITAN AREA TO EVALUATE HYPOTHETICALLY THE CAPACITY OF MENTALLY RETARDED PERSONS TO STAND TRIAL AND PLEAD GUILTY INDICATE THAT MENTALLY RETARDED DEFENDANTS HAVE THE ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM; THAT MENTAL RETARDATES HAVE THE ABILITY TO ASSIST AN ATTORNEY IN THEIR DEFENSE; THAT ACCUSED PERSONS DO NOT ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE A KNOWING WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL, THE RIGHT TO CONFRONT THEIR ACCUSERS, AND THE PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION; AND THAT MENTAL RETARDATES, WHEN PLEADING GUILTY, ARE CAPABLE OF KNOWING THEY CAN BE IMPRISONED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME SET BY THE JUDGE. FOUR PRIMARY FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT THE COMPETENCY OF MENTALLY RETARDED PERSONS IN MAKING GUILTY PLEAS ARE EXAMINED IN DETAIL: (1) CAPACITY TO STAND TRIAL, (2) ADVANTAGES OF ALLOWING A GUILTY PLEA, (3) COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL AND PLEAD GUILTY AND WHETHER STANDARDS FOR TRIALS AND GUILTY PLEAS SHOULD DIFFER, AND (4) COMPETENCY TO WAIVE THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE VALIDITY OF A GUILTY PLEA BY A MENTALLY RETARDED DEFENDANT WHO IS COMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL AND WHO HAS THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL BE JUDGED UNDER THE SAME TEST THAT DETERMINES THE VALIDITY OF A GUILTY PLEA BY A DEFENDANT WITH NORMAL MENTAL CAPACITY. CASE LAW IS CITED.