The relationship between criminal charges, diagnoses, and psycholegal opinions among federal pretrial defendants

Abstract

This study analyzed data from 1710 criminal defendants referred by federal courts throughout the United States. We examined 12 categories of criminal charges with respect to diagnosed psychopathology and opinions related to competence to stand trial (CST) and criminal responsibility (CR) at the time of the alleged offense. Overall, 18% of the present sample were found to be incompetent to stand trial, while 12% were found to be not criminally responsible or 'insane.' In this study, crimes were associated with rates of psychopathology and rates of opinions regarding CST and CR. The findings of this study suggest that individuals who are charged with different crimes have different mental states and psychopathology and are therefore found to have differential rates of competence and sanity.

Ten Year Research Update (2001–2010): Evaluations for Competence to Stand Trial (Adjudicative Competence)

“…However, Cox and Zapf () found that an even higher rate of incompetence was found in patients diagnosed with non ‐psychotic major disorders (e.g., major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder). The latter finding was not confirmed by Cochrane, Grisso, and Frederick (), who found relatively low rates of incompetence in a sample of 1,719 federal criminal defendants evaluated for AC. The latter study, however, reported a relatively high rate of incompetence for AC examinees with organic diagnoses (38%) and those diagnosed with intellectual disability (30%).…”

“…Cooper and Zapf (), Hubbard, Zapf, and Ronan (), and Warren et al () found that individuals charged with a violent crime were less likely to be deemed incompetent, while individuals judged incompetent were more likely to face charges for non‐violent offenses. Cochrane et al () found the highest rates of incompetence among individuals who were charged with offenses that would be considered serious and violent, but diagnosis rather than charges better explained AC findings. The authors cautioned that attempting to understand AC findings in relation to the severity of crimes may be misleading.…”

Criminal responsibility: Meta‐analysis and study space

“…Some research also uses evaluator opinion as an outcome measure. Evaluators, on average, opine about 10% of referred defendants insane (Cochrane, Grisso, & Frederick, ; Johnson, Nicholson, & Service, ; Warren, Murrie, Chauhan, Dietz, & Morris, ; Warren, Rosenfeld, Fitch, & Hawk, ). Sometimes these opinions supportive of insanity focus on just one prong of the jurisdiction's insanity test.…”

The Influence of Time and Treatment on Recall of Mental State at the Time of Offense: Incompetent Defendants and Evaluation of Insanity

“…This phenomenon appears most likely to occur among individuals diagnosed with psychotic disorders, a group that is most likely to merit the insanity defense (Mossman et al, 2007). Indeed, individuals adjudicated not guilty by reason of insanity are most likely to have been diagnosed with a psychotic disorder (Cochrane, Grisso, & Frederick, 2001;Nestor & Haycock, 1997;Rogers & Shuman, 2000;Warren, Murrie, Chauhan, Dietz, & Morris, 2004).…”