News and Developments 2007: Mental Illness

NEW RESOURCES: American Bar Association Sponsored Study Calls for Death Penalty Moratorium

According to a new study released by the American Bar Association, Ohio's capital punishment system is so flawed that it should be suspended while the state conducts a thorough review of its fairness and accuracy. The study, conducted by a 10-member panel of Ohio attorneys appointed by the ABA, found that the state's death penalty is prone to racial and geographic imbalances and that it meets only four of the 93 ABA recommendations to ensure a fair capital punishment system.

NEW RESOURCES: North Carolina Report Examines Mental Illness and the Death Penalty

A new report from the Charlotte School of Law on mental illness and the death penalty reveals that obstacles entrenched within the criminal justice system impede efforts to identify those with severe mental illness and treat them fairly. The report, "Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: A Diagnostic Approach," is based on a 2006 symposium hosted by the law school.

Supreme Court Blocks Execution of Mentally Ill Inmate

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 28, 2007, that Scott Panetti, a man with severe mental illness on Texas's death row, deserves a rehearing on his claim of mental incompetence.  The Court's 5-4 ruling overturned a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that had used an overly restrictive definition of what constitutes insanity.  The lower court had held that mere knowledge of one's crime, without a rational understanding, was sufficient to allow an execution to go forward.

Texas Scores Poorly in Mental Health Services While Executing Many with Mental Illness

A recent study conducted by the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) has revealed that Texas is almost last among states in spending on mental health services and performs poorly in other mental health areas. According to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Texas ranked 47th in the nation in per-capita spending on mental health services, and received a grade of "D" for information access and a grade of "C" overall.

Florida Supreme Court Reduces Death Sentence Because of Mental Illness

The Florida Supreme Court reduced a death sentence to life without parole because of the defendant's serious mental illness. The court noted that this was "one of the most documented cases of serious mental illnesses this court has reviewed." In its decision rejecting the trial judge's death sentence for Christopher Offord (pictured), the justices unanimously held that the death penalty was a disproportionate punishment due to Offord's long-standing mental problems.

NEW RESOURCES: Amnesty International Report: "Prisoner-Assisted Homicides" regarding Volunteers

With a number of executions of inmates who have waived their appeals approaching in the U.S., Amnesty International has released a new report, "Prisoner-assisted homicide--more 'volunteer' executions loom." The report addresses the fact that about 12% of executions in the U.S. since the death penalty was reinstated have been of inmates who gave up appeals that would have extended their time on death row. The report looks at some of the possible reasons for the large number of volunteers including mental illness and the conditions on death row.

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Three Texas Death Sentences

The United States Supreme Court overturned the death sentences of three Texas inmates in separate 5-4 rulings today. In all three cases, the juries had been prevented by the Texas statute (since changed) from fully considering the mitigating evidence presented by the defendants, evidence such as their low IQ or other mental deficiencies. In Smith v. Texas (No. 05-11304), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals had reconsidered Smith's death sentence after the case had been previously reviewed and sent back by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Whether Texas Man is Mentally Competent to be Executed

On Wednesday, April 18, at 1 PM, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Panetti v. Quarterman. This case focuses on the question of whether an inmate must have a rational understanding of his crime and why he is being punished prior to execution, or whether mere awareness of his situation is sufficient for mental competency. For a fuller description of the case, see Supreme Court (Pending 2007 cases). This page includes links to some of the legal briefs filed in this case.

"The Mentally Ill, Behind Bars"- an Op-ed by Bernard Harcourt

In a recent New York Times op-ed, University of Chicago law and criminology professor Bernard Harcourt notes that a growing number of individuals "who used to be tracked for mental health treatment are now getting a one-way ticket to jail." Pointing to a Justice Department study released in September 2006, Harcourt notes that 56% of those jailed in state prisons and 64% of all inmates across the nation reported mental health problems within the past year.

Supreme Court Takes Fourth Texas Death Penalty Case

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on January 5 to hear another death penalty case from Texas, this one involving a defendant who may be mentally incompetent.  In 1986, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to execute an inmate who is presently insane.  The U.S.