What is the legal standard to determine if a defendant is competent to stand trial? Competency to stand trial (CST) came about to light in the U.S. Supreme Court case Dusky v. United State which established that in order for a defendant to be tried that they have must have sufficient present ability to consult with their lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and factual understanding of the proceedings against him (Dusky v. United States, 1960). Kruh and Grisso (2009) provide analysis of some of the terms that were used in the Dusky test:
• Sufficient ability and reasonable understanding specify that CST does not require complete and fully unimpaired functioning, whereas reasonable implies to relativity to the context …show more content…
Tests for insanity include M’Naghten Rule and the American Law Institute Model Penal Code. The M’Naghten Rule focuses on whether defendant knew nature of the crime or understood right from wrong at the time the crime was committed. Under the American Law Institute (ALI) a defendant may be found not guilty by reason of insanity if lacking either cognitive or volitional (irresistible impulse) capacity. The ALI test provides “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to the appreciate the criminality (wrongfulness) of his conduct or to conform this conduct to the requirements of the law” (Goldstein. Morse, & Packer, 2013, p. …show more content…
Hinckley’s “reason” for trying to assassinate the than president Ronald Regan was that he was trying to get the attention of actress Jodie Foster. Lead psychiatric expert for the defense a Dr. William Carpenter concluded that “the defendant suffered from schizophrenia. He saw Hinckley has having four major symptoms of mental illness: an incapacity to have an ordinary emotional arousal," "autistic retreat from reality," depression including "suicidal features," and an inability to work or establish social bonds. So focused was he on achieving a "magical unification with Jodie Foster" that he didn 't see the consequences of his action for his victims” (Linder, 2008, section the trial). How the other hand, the government’s (prosecution) lead expert Dr. Park Dietz report concluded “Mr. Hinckley 's history is clearly indicative of a person who did not function in a usual reasonable manner. However, there is no evidence that he was so impaired that he could not appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law” (2008). Ultimately, the determination of guilt or innocence lad on the jury and they came back with a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity for the fifteen
• Sufficient ability and reasonable understanding specify that CST does not require complete and fully unimpaired functioning, whereas reasonable implies to relativity to the context …show more content…
Tests for insanity include M’Naghten Rule and the American Law Institute Model Penal Code. The M’Naghten Rule focuses on whether defendant knew nature of the crime or understood right from wrong at the time the crime was committed. Under the American Law Institute (ALI) a defendant may be found not guilty by reason of insanity if lacking either cognitive or volitional (irresistible impulse) capacity. The ALI test provides “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to the appreciate the criminality (wrongfulness) of his conduct or to conform this conduct to the requirements of the law” (Goldstein. Morse, & Packer, 2013, p. …show more content…
Hinckley’s “reason” for trying to assassinate the than president Ronald Regan was that he was trying to get the attention of actress Jodie Foster. Lead psychiatric expert for the defense a Dr. William Carpenter concluded that “the defendant suffered from schizophrenia. He saw Hinckley has having four major symptoms of mental illness: an incapacity to have an ordinary emotional arousal," "autistic retreat from reality," depression including "suicidal features," and an inability to work or establish social bonds. So focused was he on achieving a "magical unification with Jodie Foster" that he didn 't see the consequences of his action for his victims” (Linder, 2008, section the trial). How the other hand, the government’s (prosecution) lead expert Dr. Park Dietz report concluded “Mr. Hinckley 's history is clearly indicative of a person who did not function in a usual reasonable manner. However, there is no evidence that he was so impaired that he could not appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law” (2008). Ultimately, the determination of guilt or innocence lad on the jury and they came back with a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity for the fifteen