NCJ Number
164470
Journal
Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Volume: 24 Issue: 3 Dated: (1996) Pages: 319-331
Date Published
1996
Length
13 pages
Annotation
This study tested the so-called subversion hypothesis which posits that mentally disordered persons who commit minor offenses are prosecuted primarily for the purpose of imposing mental health treatment on them through evaluation and treatment for incompetency to stand trial.
Abstract
According to the subversion hypothesis, some mentally disordered persons find themselves in the criminal process because they do not meet the stringent civil commitment standards but do meet the less stringent criteria for disorderly conduct prosecution. An analysis of disorderly conduct prosecutions in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, in 1989 and 1990 found that only 81 (4 percent) of 1,922 defendants charged with disorderly conduct were evaluated for incompetency to stand trial in connection with the disorderly conduct charge and that only 31 were found incompetent to stand trial. A finding of incompetency did not automatically result in commitment for treatment. Behavior resulting in a criminal charge for disorderly conduct distinguished evaluated defendants from other defendants with respect to two behavior types, physical attacks on others and creating a public disturbance. Evaluated defendants had their cases dismissed more often than defendants who were never questioned for competency. Convicted evaluated defendants were more likely to be sentenced to serve time, either under community supervision or incarceration, than other defendants. The authors conclude that the findings do not support the subversion hypothesis. 66 references and 2 tables