NCJ Number
15827
Journal
Rutgers Law Review Volume: 27 Issue: 1 Dated: (FALL 1973) Pages: 160-175
Date Published
1973
Length
16 pages
Annotation
EXAMINATION OF THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE STATE'S 'RESTORED TO REASON' AND COURT ORDER STANDARDS FOR INSTITUTIONAL RELEASE.
Abstract
THE NEW JERSEY SUPREME COURT IN STATE V. MAIK (1972) HELD THAT RESTORATION TO REASON OCCURS WHEN THE UNDERLYING LATENT CONDITION OR ILLNESS PRECIPITATING DEFENDANT'S PSYCHOTIC EPISODE IS REMOVED OR EFFECTIVELY NEUTRALIZED. THE COURT ALSO HELD THAT ONLY THE COMMITTING COURT CAN MAKE THIS 'RESTORED TO REASON' DETERMINATION AND ORDER RELEASE. DISCUSSED IS THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECURITY OF SOCIETY AND TREATMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL. ALSO EXAMINED IS THE STATUTORY DISTINCTION IN NEW JERSEY BETWEEN CIVILLY COMMITTED AND CRIMINALLY ACQUITTED PATIENTS. FOR THE LATTER, THE COURT REQUIRES THAT THE ORIGINAL 'DEFECT OF REASON' BE ELIMINATED BEFORE RELEASE CAN BE APPROVED. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THIS STANDARD OFTEN PRESUPPOSES THE REMOVAL OR ELIMINATION OF THE UNDERLYING ILLNESS - SOMETHING NOT REQUIRED FOR THE CIVILLY COMMITTED - AND DENIES RELEASE TO PATIENTS IN REMISSION. SUCH A REQUIREMENT, THE AUTHOR CONTENDS, EMPHASIZES THE SECURITY OF SOCIETY OVER ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE BEST ACCOMODATION OF THE INTERESTS OF SOCIETY AND THE INDIVIDUAL WOULD BE A RELEASE STANDARD OF DANGEROUSNESS TO OTHERS WHICH IS ADMINISTERED BY HOSPITAL AUTHORITIES SUBJECT TO COURT REVIEW. THIS ACCOMMODATION WOULD ALSO ALLOW PSYCHIATRISTS TO DETERMINE THE RELEASE POTENTIAL OF INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS WITH A MINIMUM OF INITIAL LEGAL INTERFERENCE.