Case Study Of Lisa Miller's Competency To Stand Trial

One look at this case study and one will immediately wonder, would Lisa Miller be competent to stand trial and if so would she be able to enter a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity? First, a solid understanding must be reached as to what it means to be competent to stand trial. A look at how Costanzo and Krauss (2015) define competency to stand trial and how it pertains to the Miller case. Then an examination of an article in which competency to stand trial is the main focus. Next, what factors are involved when determining if a defendant can be found not guilty by reason of insanity as per Costanzo and Krauss (2015). Then an exploration of an article in which the insanity defense is the main focus. Finally, a throughout look at Lisa …show more content…
There are a few aspects to consider when determining whether or not Miller is competent to stand trial. The question of a defendant’s competency to stand trial is usually addressed during pre-trial but can also be assessed at any time should there be bona fide doubt in regards to her competency. It is important to keep in mind that the presence of a mental illness is not “just cause” to question the defendant’s competency to stand trial. In order for there to be bona fide doubt, at least one mental health professional would need to evaluate Miller (Costanzo & Krauss, 2015, p. 161). Costanzo and Krauss (2015) mention the competency to stand trial is determined by what a mental health professional deems is a defendant’s mental state at the time the trial. Two aspects of competency must be displayed by a defendant - foundational competence, which means she must be able to assist her attorney with her own defense and decisional competency, which means she must have the ability to make educated decisions on her own behalf. (Costanzo & Krauss, 2015, p. …show more content…
Roesch and colleagues (1996) explore the MacArthur Treatment Competence model in great detail within this article. This is of particular interest because that is the model most often used today to gauge a defendant’s competency to stand trial. The MacArthur Treatment Competence Study (MTCS), according to Roesch and colleagues (1996) evaluates four standards that are used to determine consent for treatment and their “possible applications to the assessment of competency to stand trial” (p. 102), those standards are the ability to communicate choice, the ability to understand pertinent information, the ability to fully comprehend the seriousness of the situation and its consequences, and rationality (p. 102). In Miller’s case, the first, third, and fourth standards are easily applicable. For example, should Miller’s mental illness (major depressive disorder with psychotic features) inhibit her ability to communicate her choices, or if Miller is still unable to recognize that she is mentally ill or if she holds some delusion that God will save her because