Information came from reviews of statutes and case law relevant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Ake v. Oklahoma in 1985, from a national survey of jurisdictional practices, and from two rounds of detailed field research in Baltimore, Detroit, and Phoenix. The field research included interviews with defense attorneys, prosecutors, mental health officials, judges, and court administrators. The Ake decision expanded the rights of indigent criminal defendants to include access to mental health expert assistance if insanity is likely to be a significant issue at trial. However, the research revealed that various organizational, economic, and other contingencies that are not necessarily related to written rules and policies tend to determine how mental health expert assistance is actually provided. These results were considered in view of professional standards to develop a set of 17 recommendations for implementing the Ake decision. The five processes that were common to all jurisdictions formed the framework for the recommendations: 1) requests for mental health expert assistance, 2) selection and employment of mental health experts, 3) evaluation of defendants, 4) preparation and distribution of evaluation reports, and 5) review of the process. Table and footnotes. For an executive summary, see NCJ-117276.
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Partners in Crisis: Improving Police Response to Individuals in Moments of Crisis by Providing Service Alternatives
- Examining the Relationship Between Firearm Violence Exposure and Posttraumatic Symptomatology in Adolescents: A Scoping Review
- "People, Places, and Things": Understanding the Context of Participants' Lives in a Diversion Drug Court