Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
However, there must be a formal institutional hearing, the prisoner must be found to be dangerous to himself or others, the prisoner must be diagnosed with a serious mental illness, and the mental health care professional must state that the medication prescribed is in the prisoner's best interest. 14th 1992 Riggins v. Nevada
United States federal laws governing offenders with mental diseases or defects (18 U.S.C. §§ 4241–4248) provide for the evaluation and handling of defendants who are suspected of having mental diseases or defects. The laws were completely revamped by the Insanity Defense Reform Act in the wake of the John Hinckley Jr. verdict.
The American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards stated in 1994 that the issue of a defendant's current mental incompetence is the single most important issue in the criminal mental health field, noting that an estimated 24,000 to 60,000 forensic evaluations of a criminal defendant's competency to stand trial were ...
A Texas death row inmate with a long history of mental illness, and who tried to call Jesus Christ and John F. Kennedy as trial witnesses, is not competent to be executed, a federal judge ruled.
The Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services said release is required by U.S. Supreme Court decision. Refiled murder cases highlight rift between prosecutors, state mental ...
Declared incompetent to stand trial, he was sent to North Texas State Hospital in mid-June 2004. After Thomas spent 47 days in the hospital, psychiatrist Joseph Black wrote to the court that Thomas had drug-induced psychosis , saying that he was competent and that he might attempt to exaggerate his mental illness by engaging in self-harm or ...
The law requires two experts to agree that a defendant is mentally incompetent before a ruling is issued. The person would then receive treatment until they were able to understand the charges ...
A Durham rule, product test, or product defect rule is a rule in a criminal case by which a jury may determine a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity because a criminal act was the product of a mental disease. Examples in which such rules were articulated in common law include State v. Pike (1870) and Durham v. United States (1954).