Use of the insanity defense: A survey of attorneys in wyoming

Ph.D., J.D. George L. Blau; McGinley, Hugh

doi:10.1002/bsl.2370130407

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, they may be more committed to juvenile advocacy issues. While a higher response rate would have been desirable, the response rate (20%) is considered moderate and is consistent with other attorney surveys (Blau & McGinley, 1995;Luchins et al, 2006;Mossman & Kapp, 1997;Redding et al, 2001;Viljoen & Wingrove, 2007). In addition, the sample size of 214 is fairly large in comparison with those of other attorney surveys (Hoge et al, 1992;Tobey et al, 2000).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…The response rate was 30.0% for NACC, 2 but was lower for NJDC (9.9%), 3 which is not surprising as NJDC did not permit reminders. These figures are comparable to those for surveys of attorneys that employed similar methodology and addressed lawyer's opinions on issues such as involuntary treatment and mental health expert testimony (e.g., Blau & McGinley, 1995;Luchins, Cooper, Hanrahan, & Heyrman, 2006;Mossman & Kapp, 1997;Redding, Floyd, & Hawk, 2001;Viljoen & Wingrove, 2007). This was an optional question.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Defense attorneys' concerns about the competence of adolescent defendants

Viljoen

McLachlan²,

Wingrove³

et al. 2010

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research indicates that a sizable proportion of adolescent defendants have difficulty understanding and participating in legal proceedings against them, and may be incompetent to stand trial. To examine attorneys' experience in defending adolescents with competence-related difficulties, 214 juvenile attorneys were surveyed. Findings indicated that attorneys have doubts about the competence of approximately 10% of adolescent defendants, and that they find these cases particularly challenging to defend. Most attorneys appear to recognize that developmental factors may contribute to adolescents' competence-related difficulties, and believe that the law should accept developmental immaturity as a basis for incompetence findings. In approximately half of the cases in which attorneys had doubts about competence, attorneys did not request a competence evaluation but instead made other efforts to address competence issues, such as by teaching adolescents about legal proceedings and further involving their parents. The implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 80%

Defense attorneys' concerns about the competence of adolescent defendants

Viljoen

McLachlan²,

Wingrove³

et al. 2010

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The conditional release system is part of the overall insanity defense “system.” It is plausible, but not testable by these data, that in states where the insanity defense is infrequently raised, perhaps due to a low tolerance for mental health defenses, conditional release will be similarly difficult to obtain. Blau and McGinley (1996) describe the plea bargaining tactics of both defense attorneys and prosecutors with this defense. Raising the defense gives an advantage to the defense in those jurisdictions where the prosecution is open to a negotiated insanity acquittal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors associated with the conditional release of persons acquitted by reason of insanity: A decision tree approach.

Callahan

Silver

1998

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most NGRI (nol guilty by reason of insanity) acquittees are hospitalized for some period of time following acquittal, which raises the q!~eslion of when an individual can be safely released into the community. The conditional release (CR) of persons acquitted hy reason of insanil}~ therefore, provokes the question of public safety. This study examines the CR systems in four stales-Connecticut, lIth'ryland, New lbrk, and Ohio. A study sample of 529 persons acquilted as NGRl from 1985 to 1987 was followed lip for al least five years to de/mnille who is conditionally released. Following a description of the CR system.\~ findings suggestive of the role of dangerousness and diagnosis as prediclOrs of CR are presented. Personal characteristics are also significant factors in predicting who will be released. The lmgth of hospitalization for this populatioll and other descriptive faclOrs sudl as history of hospitalization, arrests, substance abuse, family violence, and living arrangements are also addressed.John Hinckley, thl: wuuld-bl: assassin uf President Ronald Reagan, is a noteworthy defendant in the insanity defense debate during the 20th century. A successful plea of insanity in 1982 placcd Hinckley and the insanity defense front stage as "Exhibit 1" as to what is wrong with the system. A decade later, in 1992, Jeffrey Dahmer, Milwaukcc's serial killcr/cannibal, was unsuccessful with an insanity plea, but his case nonctheless elicited intense debate about the merit (or lack thereof) of the insanity defensc. These periodic visible trials force a rehashing of legislative initiativcs, some more extensive than others, such as the abolition of the insanity plea or the institution of a guilty but mentally ill (GBMI) statute. 4The controvcrsy concerning John Hinckley did not end with his acquittal. In April 1987 Hinckley requcsted an unescortcd off-grounds leave to spend Easter

show abstract

“…The literature suggests that within the criminal justice system, it is a matter of debate whether raising the insanity defense is beneficial for criminal defendants (Lymburner and Roesch 1999). On the side of insanity as beneficial, some argue that by raising questions regarding the defendant's mental health, the defense attorney will have more leverage to negotiate the case disposition (Blau and McGinley 1995). In contrast, there appear to be negative consequences in simply raising a defense of mental illness.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Race, Gender, and the Social Construction of Mental Illness in the Criminal Justice System

Thompson

2010

Sociological Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article tests whether perceptions of "normal" defendants influence the use of psychiatric evaluations in the criminal justice system. The author theorizes that typifications-or taken-for-granted assumptions-of African Americans as "criminals" and women as "mentally ill" will influence court actors' perceptions of the rationality of a defendant's criminal actions. Using case-control sampling methods, the author compiled data from a large Midwestern county to examine the demographic, familial, legal, and psychiatric predictors of which felony defendants receive a psychiatric evaluation; these psychiatric evaluations are indications that the defendant may be considered exempt from criminal responsibility. Using logistic regression, the author finds that mental health status is the best predictor of psychiatric evaluations but that criminal justice decision-makers' attributions of criminal responsibility are also influenced by typifications of defendants based on race and gender.

show abstract

Use of the insanity defense: A survey of attorneys in wyoming

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Defense attorneys' concerns about the competence of adolescent defendants

Defense attorneys' concerns about the competence of adolescent defendants

Factors associated with the conditional release of persons acquitted by reason of insanity: A decision tree approach.

Race, Gender, and the Social Construction of Mental Illness in the Criminal Justice System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About