NCJ Number
17735
Journal
Tennessee Law Review Volume: 40 Issue: 4 Dated: (SUMMER 1973) Pages: 659-688
Date Published
1973
Length
30 pages
Annotation
IN JACKSON V. INDIANA (1972), THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS OF DEFENDANT, A PERMANENTLY RETARDED DEAF MUTE, WERE VIOLATED BY AN ORDER OF COMMITMENT UNTIL COMPETENCY WAS RESTORED.
Abstract
IN THIS CASE, THE DEFENSE ARGUED THAT THE COURT ORDERED CONFINEMENT WAS THE EQUIVALENT OF A LIFE SENTENCE WITHOUT CRIMINAL CONVICTION, SINCE THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF THE DEFENDANT'S COMPETENCY BEING RESTORED. AN ANALYSIS OF PRE-JACKSON CASE LAW SHOWS THAT INCOMPETENT DEFENDANTS USED TO BE AUTOMATICALLY COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION REGARDLESS OF CULPABILITY, SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED, OR MERITS OF STRENGTH OF THE CASE. EXPLORED ARE CONSTITUTIONAL OBJECTIONS TO THIS PRACTICE, WHICH CENTER AROUND THE CONSITUTIONAL DEPRIVATIONS THE DEFENDANT SUFFERS AS COMPARED WITH OTHER INDIVIDUALS ACCUSED OF CRIME, AND THE INEQUALITIES OF PROCESS AND TREATMENT HE ENDURES THAT A CIVILLY COMMITTED PATIENT WOULD NOT HAVE TO FACE. THE AUTHOR CRITICIZES THE SUPREME COURT'S EQUAL PROTECTION ANALYSIS OF JACKSON, WHICH WAS BASED ON THE DIFFERENCES IN COMMITMENT AND RELEASE STANDARDS FOR CIVILLY COMMITTED PATIENTS AND DEFENDANTS COMMITTED UNDER THE CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURE. HE CONTENDS THAT THE HOLDING MAY SUGGEST THAT STATES TREAT DEFENDANTS FOUND INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL AS THEY WOULD CIVILLY COMMITTED INDIVIDUALS, AND THAT COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL BE JUDGED BY A CIVIL COMMITMENT STANDARD AND EFFECTUATED ACCORDING TO CIVIL COMMITMENT PROCEDURES. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THAT THE BASIS FOR COMMITMENT BE A PROVISIONAL TRIAL'S FINDING THAT THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE ACTS ATTRIBUTED TO HIM AND THAT, HAD HE BEEN CRIMINALLY TRIED, HE WOULD HAVE HAD NO DEFENSE TO THE CHARGES. TIME SPENT IN A MENTAL INSTITUTION PURSUANT TO SUCH COMMITMENT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS ANY SUBSEQUENT SENTENCE IMPOSED IF DEFENDANT IS LATER TRIED AND CONVICTED. CHARGES WOULD BE AUTOMATICALLY DISMISSED AFTER DEFENDANT HAS BEEN IN THE MENTAL INSTITUTION FOR A PERIOD EQUAL TO THE MAXIMUM SENTENCE HE COULD HAVE RECEIVED HAD HE BEEN TRIED AND FOUND GUILTY OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED. PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THIS MAXIMUM TERM, DEFENDANT'S RELEASE FROM THE MENTAL INSTITUTION WOULD BE CONDITIONED ON HIS RECOVERY OF COMPETENCY, AT WHICH POINT HE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO A CONVENTIONAL CRIMINAL TRIAL. TREATMENT DURING THIS HOSPITALIZATION PERIOD WOULD BE GEARED TO THE OBJECTIVE OF RESTORATION OF COMPETENCY, AND THE COURTS BY PERIODIC INQUIRY WOULD MAKE CERTAIN THAT THIS FUNCTION WAS BEING CARRIED OUT. IF IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PATIENT WAS PERMANENTLY RETARDED AND UNLIKELY TO EVER REGAIN COMPETENCY, PLACEMENT IN A COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY FOR THE MENTALLY RETARDED WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. AFTER THIS PERIOD, HOWEVER, THE ISSUE OF DEFENDANT'S COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL WOULD BECOME MOOT, AS THE CHARGES WOULD HAVE BEEN DROPPED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)