Psychiatric Quarterly

, Volume 63, Issue 3, pp 209–243

The insanity verdict, the psychopath, and post-acquittal confinement

  • Abraham L. Halpern
Articles
  • 82 Downloads

Abstract

Automatic post-acquittal confinement, an almost inevitable concomitant of a verdict of not guilty or not responsible by reason of insanity has for many acquittees been nothing more than punishment in disguise. Replacement of the insanity defense by statutes that provide for expert witness testimony to show that the defendant lacked the state of mind required as an element of the offense charged, has been found by two state supreme courts to be in accord with constitutional requirements. Procedures can be implemented, with due regard for public safety, so that all offenders, mentally disordered or otherwise, may be dealt with in an ethical, effective and humane manner. The 1992 decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Foucha v. Louisiana, holding that the Constitution does not permit the continued confinement of a still dangerous, but no longer mentally ill, insanity acquittee, makes it all the more necessary that the insanity defense be abolished and that an offender's mental illness be considered primarily in the context of mitigation, disposition and sentencing, rather than exculpation.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1. (a)
    Halpern, AL: Statement Concerning Elimination of the Insanity Rule Before the New York State Temporary Commission on Revision of the Penal Law and Criminal Code, Syracuse, NY, November 18, 1964;Google Scholar
  2. 1. (b)
    The Insanity Defense: a juridical anachronism. Psychiatric Annals 7:398–409, 1977;Google Scholar
  3. 1. (c)
    The fiction of legal insanity and the misuse of psychiatry. Journal of Legal Medicine 2:18–74, 1980;Google Scholar
  4. 1. (d)
    Reconsideration of the insanity defense and related issues in the aftermath of the Hinckley trial. Psychiatric Quarterly; 54: 260–264, 1982;Google Scholar
  5. 1. (e)
    Statement on the insanity defense. In Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, July 19 and 28; August 2 and 4, 1982. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982, Serial No. J-97-126, pp.293–403, 427–428;Google Scholar
  6. 1. (f)
    Elimination of the exculpatory insanity rule: a modern societal need. In Psychiatric Clinics of North America: Forensic Psychiatry (RL Sadoff, ed), Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders & Co., 6:611–627, 1983;Google Scholar
  7. 1. (g)
    Further comments on the insanity defense in the aftermath of the Hinckley trial. Psychiatric Quarterly 56:62–69, 1984;Google Scholar
  8. 1. (h)
    The AMA report on the insanity defense in criminal trials. Psychiatric Quarterly 56:236–238, 1984;Google Scholar
  9. 1. (i)
    The APA insanity rule: a metaphysical subtlety. In Critical Issues in American Psychiatry and the Law vol.5 (Rosner RI, Harmon RB, eds), ch.7, New York, Plenum Publishing Corp., 1989, pp.93–110;Google Scholar
  10. 1. (j)
    Abolition of the insanity defense in Victoria. In Emerging Issues of the 1990s in Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, Proceedings of the 10th Annual Congress of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 1989, pp.29–36;Google Scholar
  11. 1. (k)
    The insanity defense in the 21st century. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 35:187–189, 1991.Google Scholar
  12. 2.
    See, for example, McDonald v. United States, 312 F.2d 847, 851 (1962).Google Scholar
  13. 3.
    See, for example, State v. Krol, 344 A.2d 289 (1975).Google Scholar
  14. 4.
    State v. Foucha, 563 So.2d 1138 (1990).Google Scholar
  15. 5.
    Foucha v. Louisiana, 111 S.Ct. 1412 (1991).Google Scholar
  16. 6.
    National Law Journal, October 7, 1991, p.12.Google Scholar
  17. 7.
    National Law Journal, August 19, 1991, p.S26.Google Scholar
  18. 8.
    Quotation from Babylonian Talmud, cited in Quen JM: An historical view of the M'Naughten trial. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 62:1,1968, p.43.Google Scholar
  19. 9.
    Perlin ML: Mental Disability Law-Civil and Criminal vol.3. Charlottesville, The Mitchie Company, 1989, p.283 fn.28, quoting Bracton H: De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae, 2:425 (Longman, Thorne trans. 1968).Google Scholar
  20. 10.
    State v. Searcy, 798 P.2d 914 (1990) (McDevitt J, dissenting at p.928), citing Holdsworth, A History of English Law, 1908, vol.3, p.371; Glueck, Mental Disorder and the Criminal Law, 1927, p.125; and Biggs, The Guilty Mind, 1955, p.83.Google Scholar
  21. 11.
    Robitscher J, Haynes AK: In defense of the insanity defense. Emory Law Journal 31:9–60, 1983; quoted in American Psychiatric Association Statement on the Insanity Defense, Washington, American Psychiatric Association, 1982, p.2 (Reprinted in American Journal of Psychiatry, 140:681–688, 1983).Google Scholar
  22. 12.
    Hale M: The History of the Pleas of the Crown. London, ER Nutt & R Gosling, 1736, p.36.Google Scholar
  23. 13.
    Tancredi LR, Lieb J, Slaby AE: Legal Issues in Psychiatric Care. Hagerstown, Harper & Row, 1975, p.4.Google Scholar
  24. 14.
    Quen JM: James Hadfield and medical jurisprudence of insanity. New York State Journal of Medicine 69:1221–1226, 1969, p.1223.Google Scholar
  25. 15.
    Walker N: Crime and Insanity in England vol.1. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 1968; cited in Stone AA: Mental Health & Law: a System in Transition. New York, Jason Aronson, 1976, p.219.Google Scholar
  26. 16.
    Szasz TS: Psychiatry, ethics and the criminal law. Columbia Law Review 58:183–198, 1958, p.191.Google Scholar
  27. 17.
    Rex v. Hadfield, 27 St. Tr. 1281, 1307 (1800).Google Scholar
  28. 18.
    Partridge B: Broadmoor. London, Chatto & Windus, 1953, p.1.Google Scholar
  29. 19.
    Criminal Lunatics Act, 40 George 3, c.94 (1800), quoted in Note: Compulsory commitment following a successful insanity defense. Northwestern Law Review 56:409–466, 1961, p.409.Google Scholar
  30. 20.
    Smith R: Trial by Medicine: Insanity and Responsibility in Victorian Trials. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 1981, p.23.Google Scholar
  31. 21.
    State v. Pike, 49 N.H. 399 (1870).Google Scholar
  32. 22.
    Gen. St. 494, cited in State v. Jones, 50 N.H. 369,381 (1871).Google Scholar
  33. 23.
    Henig v. Commissioner of Mental Hygiene et al., decided March 24, 1977; reported in New York Law Journal 177:65, April 5, 1977.Google Scholar
  34. 24.
    Henig v. Commissioner of Mental Hygiene, 383 N.Y.S.2d 793,794 (1976).Google Scholar
  35. 25.
    New York Law Journal 177:65, April 5, 1977, p.1.Google Scholar
  36. 26.
    Act of June 26, 1980, 1980 New York Laws ch. 548, cited in Halpern AL, Rachlin S, Portnow SL: New York's insanity defense reform act of 1980: a forensic psychiatric perspective. Albany Law Review 45:661–677, 1981.Google Scholar
  37. 27.
    White WA: Insanity and the Criminal Law. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1923, pp.224–225.Google Scholar
  38. 28.
    Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry: Criminal responsibility and psychiatric expert testimony, Report No. 26, 1954.Google Scholar
  39. 29.
    American Law Institute, Model Penal Code, Proposed Official Draft, 1962, Sec. 4.01.Google Scholar
  40. 30.
    M'Naghten's Case, 8 Eng. Rep. 718,722 (1843).Google Scholar
  41. 31.
    Model Penal Code, Tentative Draft No. 4. Philadelphia, The American Law Institute, April 25, 1955, Comments, Sec. 4.08, p.199.Google Scholar
  42. 32.
    Biggs J: The Guilty Mind: Psychiatry and the Law of Homicide. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955, p.145.Google Scholar
  43. 33.
    Commonwealth v. Woodhouse, 164 A.2d 98,109 (1960).Google Scholar
  44. 34.
    United States v. Currens, 290 F.2d 751,767 (1961).Google Scholar
  45. 35.
    Cleckley H: The Mask of Sanity 5th ed. St. Louis, Mosby, 1976.Google Scholar
  46. 36.
    White RW: The Abnormal Personality. Ronald Press, 1948, p.401; quoted in United States v. Currens, 290 F.2d 751,762 (1961).Google Scholar
  47. 37.
    Government of Virgin Islands v. Fredericks, 578 F.2d 927 (1978) (Appendix, pp.951–952).Google Scholar
  48. 38.
    Hare RD, Hart SD, Harpur T: Psychopathy and the DSM-IV criteria for antisocial personality disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 100:1–8, 1991.Google Scholar
  49. 39.
    Hart SD, Hare RD, Harpur TJ: The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R): An overview for researchers and clinicians In Advances in Psychological Assessment vol 8, Rosen JC, McReynolds P, eds. New York, Plenum Publishing Corp., in press.Google Scholar
  50. 40.
    Durham v. United States, 214 F.2d 862,874–875 (1954).Google Scholar
  51. 41.
    Douglas v. United States, 239 F.2d 52,60 (1956), fn.12.Google Scholar
  52. 42.
    Williams v. United States, 250 F.2d 19,25 (1957).Google Scholar
  53. 43.
    American Bar Association: Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards, First Tentative Draft, 1983, Standard 7-6.1, 7–260.Google Scholar
  54. 44.
    American Psychiatric Association Statement on the Insanity Defense. Washington, American Psychiatric Association, 1982, p.12.Google Scholar
  55. 45.
    State v. Jacob, 669 P.2d 865 (1983).Google Scholar
  56. 46.
    Insanity defense in criminal trials and limitations of psychiatric testimony: report of the AMA Board of Trustees. Journal of the American Medical Association 251:2967–2981, 1984.Google Scholar
  57. 47.
    Public Law No. 98–473.Google Scholar
  58. 48.
    18 United States Code ch. 1, Sec. 20.Google Scholar
  59. 49.
    18 United States Code ch. 313, Sec. 4243.Google Scholar
  60. 50.
    United States v. Crutchfield, 893 F.2d 376 (1990).Google Scholar
  61. 51.
    District of Columbia Code, Sec. 24–301(e).Google Scholar
  62. 52.
    State v. Maik, 287 A.2d (1972).Google Scholar
  63. 53.
    Perr IN: Problems surrounding release of persons found not guilty by reason of insanity. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 20:719, 1975, p.725.Google Scholar
  64. 54.
    State v. Carter, 316 A.2d 449,453 (1974).Google Scholar
  65. 55.
    State v. Krol, 344 A.2d 289 (1975).Google Scholar
  66. 56.
    State v. Fields, 390 A.2d 574, 584 (1978).Google Scholar
  67. 57.
    Application of Miller, 342 N.Y.S.2d 315 (1972).Google Scholar
  68. 58.
    Application of Miller, 362 N.Y.S.2d 628 (1974).Google Scholar
  69. 59.
    Overholser v. O'Beirne, 302 F.2d 852 (1962); quoted in Katz J, Goldstein J, Dershowitz AM: Psychoanalysis, Psychiatry and Law. New York, The Free Press, 1967, p.616.Google Scholar
  70. 60.
    Jones v. United States, 463 U.S. 354 (1983).Google Scholar
  71. 61.
    In re Rosenfeld, 157 F.Supp. 18,21 (1957).Google Scholar
  72. 62.
    People v. Corrente, 311 N.Y.S.2d 711 (1970).Google Scholar
  73. 63.
    Powell v. Florida, 579 F.2d 324 (1978).Google Scholar
  74. 64.
    Francois v. Henderson, 850 F.2d 231 (1988).Google Scholar
  75. 65.
    Louisiana R. S. 28:59A.Google Scholar
  76. 66.
    Jones v. United States, 463 U.S. 354 (1983).Google Scholar
  77. 67.
    Bill C-30, The House of Commons of Canada, 2nd reading, October 4, 1991, Sec. 672.1.Google Scholar
  78. 68.
    Jeffery CR: Criminal Responsibility and Mental Disease. Springfield, Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1967, p.89.Google Scholar
  79. 69.
    The Daily Times (Mamaroneck, N.Y.), June 29, 1984, p.A7.Google Scholar
  80. 70.
    Robey v. State, 456 A.2d 953 (1983).Google Scholar
  81. 71.
    State v. Brown, 465 N.E.2d 889 (1984).Google Scholar
  82. 72.
    State v. Ware, 542 N.E.2d 1115 (1988).Google Scholar
  83. 73.
    1979 Montana Laws ch. 714.Google Scholar
  84. 74.
    Utah Code Ann., Sec. 76-2-305 (1986 Supp.).Google Scholar
  85. 75.
    Idaho Code, Sec. 18–207 (1986 Supp.).Google Scholar
  86. 76.
    State v. Korell, 690 P.2d 992 (1984).Google Scholar
  87. 77.
    State v. Searcy, 798 P.2d 914 (1990).Google Scholar
  88. 78.
    Roth LH: In Myths & Realities (Hearing Transcript of the National Commission on the Insanity Defense) Arlington, National Association of Mental Health, 1983, p.93.Google Scholar
  89. 79.
    Bonnie RJ: In Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, July 19 and 28; August 2 and 4, 1982. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982, Serial No. J-97-126, pp.256 and 267.Google Scholar
  90. 80.
    Bonnie RJ: The moral basis of the insanity defense. American Bar Association Journal 69:194, 1983.Google Scholar
  91. 81.
    Roth LH: Preserve but limit the insanity defense. Psychiatric Quarterly 58:91–105, 1986–87, p.95.Google Scholar
  92. 82.
    Bazelon DL: The insanity defense: symbol and substance. Newsletter of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 9:3, 1984, p.5.Google Scholar
  93. 83.
    Slovenko R: The meaning of mental illness in criminal responsibility. Journal of Legal Medicine 5:1–61, 1984, p.60.Google Scholar
  94. 84.
    Sinclair v. State, 132 So. 581 (1931) (Griffith J, specially concurring, at p.589).Google Scholar
  95. 85.
    Stone AA: In Newsweek, May 24, 1982, p.57.Google Scholar
  96. 86.
    Stone AA: The insanity defense on trial. Hospital & Community Psychiatry 33:636–640, 1982, p.640.Google Scholar
  97. 87.
    Keenan JF: In New York State Bar Association State Bar News 24:7, 1982, p.5.Google Scholar
  98. 88.
    Tanay E: In Time, July 5, 1982, p.26.Google Scholar
  99. 89.
    Holloway v. United States, 148 F.2d 665,666–667 (1945).Google Scholar
  100. 90.
    Rappeport JR: In Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Criminal Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, June 24, 30 and July 14, 1982. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982, Serial No. J-97-122, p.227.Google Scholar
  101. 91.
    Rappeport JR: Quoted in Taylor S: Insanity laws seen as hurting society. The New York Times, July 1, 1982, p.A15.Google Scholar
  102. 92.
    Halpern AL: Uncloseting the conscience of the jury: A justly acquitted doctrine. Psychiatric Quarterly 52:144–157, 1980.Google Scholar
  103. 93.
    Carnahan WA: Changing the insanity defense. In The Insanity Defense in New York—A Report to Governor Hugh L Carey, New York State Department of Mental Hygiene, February 11, 1978, p.141.Google Scholar
  104. 94.
    Deutsch A: The Mentally Ill in North America 2nd ed. New York, Columbia University Press 1949, pp.416–417.Google Scholar
  105. 95.
    Menninger K: The Crime of Punishment. New York, the Viking Press, 1966, p.1221.Google Scholar
  106. 96.
    Slovenko R: A history of criminal procedures as related to mental disorders. Psychoanalytic Review 55:223–247, 1968, p.245.Google Scholar
  107. 97.
    112 S.Ct. 1780 (1992).Google Scholar
  108. 98.
    New York Criminal Procedure Law, Sec. 330.20, para. 1(c).Google Scholar
  109. 99.
    New York Mental Hygiene Law, Sec. 1.03, para. 20.Google Scholar
  110. 100.
    Final Report of the Sub-Committee to review the Insanity Defense Position, Council of Psychiatry and Law, American Psychiatric Association, 1988, p.3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abraham L. Halpern
    • 1
  1. 1.New York Medical CollegeUSA
  2. 2.Mamaroneck

Personalised recommendations