Psychiatric and Mental Health Commons^™

Brief Of Amicus Curiae 290 Criminal Law And Mental Health Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner's Request For Reversal And Remand, Kahler V. Kansas, 18-6135 (U.S. June 6, 2019), Paul F. Rothstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Amici curiae are a group of philosophically and politically diverse law school professors and scholars in the fields of criminal law and mental health from a variety of disciplines who have been teaching and writing about the insanity defense and related issues throughout their careers. They include the authors of leading criminal law and mental health law treatises and casebooks and numerous important scholarly books and articles.

Amici believe this case raises important questions about principles of criminal responsibility, the integral role of the insanity defense in Anglo-American law, and the inadequacy of the “mens rea alternative” to the traditional …

The Treatment Of People With Mental Illness In The Criminal Justice System: The Example Of Oneida County, New York, Alexander Black '19, Kylie Davis '18, Kenneth Gray '20, Connor O'Shea '18, Alexander Scheuer '18, Samantha Walther '18, Nico Yardas '18, Frank M. Anechiarico, Ralph Eannace, Jennifer Ambrose

Student Scholarship

This publication is two-fold: an executive summary and the report itself. The executive summary provides a general overview of the larger report, on the criminalization of the mentally ill. It begins by summarizing three case studies from the report that concern the intersection of mental health issues and the criminal justice system in Oneida County in New York State. It then provides a brief historical overview of mental health issues and the criminal justice system before going on to discuss the current best practices in addressing the criminalization of the mentally ill, including law-enforcement mechanisms, mental health courts, and reintegration …

Mental Disorder And Criminal Justice, Stephen J. Morse

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper is a chapter that will appear in REFORMING CRIMINAL JUSTICE: A REPORT OF THE ACADEMY FOR JUSTICE BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN SCHOLARSHIP AND REFORM (Erik Luna ed., Academy for Justice 2018). The criminal law treats some people with severe mental disorders doctrinally and practically differently at virtually every stage of the criminal justice process, beginning with potential incompetence to stand trial and ending with the question of competence to be executed, and such people have special needs when they are in the system. This chapter begins by exploring the fundamental mental health information necessary to make informed judgements …

Vulnerability And Just Desert: A Theory Of Sentencing And Mental Illness, E. Lea Johnston

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article analyzes risks of serious harms posed to prisoners with major mental disorders and investigates their import for sentencing under a just deserts analysis. Drawing upon social science research, the Article first establishes that offenders with serious mental illnesses are more likely than non-ill offenders to suffer physical and sexual assaults, endure housing in solitary confinement, and experience psychological deterioration during their carceral terms. The Article then explores the significance of this differential impact for sentencing within a retributive framework. It first suggests a particular expressive understanding of punishment, capacious enough to encompass foreseeable, substantial risks of serious harm …

Prolonged Solitary Confinement And The Constitution, Jules Lobel

Articles

This Article will address whether the increasing practice of prolonged or permanent solitary confinement constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Constitution, and whether it violates the due process rights of the prisoners so confined. It will not only look at United States case law, but at the jurisprudence of international human rights courts, commissions, and institutions. As the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, international jurisprudence can be helpful in determining the scope and meaning of broad terms in our Constitution such as “cruel and unusual punishments” or “due process,” as those terms ought to be understood in …

An Uncertain Privilege: Implied Waiver And The Eviseration Of The Psychotherapist Patient Privilege In The Feral Courts, Deirdre M. Smith

Faculty Publications

Twelve years ago in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996), the United States Supreme Court first recognized a federal common law psychotherapist-patient privilege and held that federal courts must protect confidential communications arising in psychotherapy despite the "likely evidentiary benefit" of such communications. This article examines the sharply conflicting authority in the federal courts that has developed since that landmark decision on the question of whether a plaintiff to a civil lawsuit waives the psychotherapist-patient privilege merely by seeking emotional distress damages. The federal courts' inconsistent and unprincipled approaches to this question renders the privilege itself nearly illusory and …

Justice, Mercy, And Craziness, Stephen J. Morse

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.