fitness to proceed

Late in 1979, Glen Burton Ake was arrested and charged with murdering a couple and wounding their two children. He was arraigned in the District Court for Canadian County, Oklahoma, in February 1980. His behavior at arraignment and in other prearraignment incidents at the jail was so bizarre that the trial judge, sua sponte, ordered him to be examined by a psychiatrist for the purpose of advising with the Court as to his impressions of whether the Defendant may need an extended period of mental observation. The examining psychiatrist reported that at times Ake appeared to be frankly delusional and claimed to be the sword of vengeance of the Lord. He diagnosed Ake as a probable paranoid schizophrenic and recommended a prolonged psychiatric evaluation to determine whether Ake was competent to stand trial. In March 1980, Ake was committed to a state hospital to be examined with respect to his present sanity. On April 10, the chief forensic psychiatrist informed the court that Ake was not competent to stand trial. The court held a competency hearing at which a psychiatrist testified that Ake was a psychotic with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia chronic with exacerbation, that he was dangerous, and that he required a maximum security facility. The court found Ake to be a mentally ill person in need of care and treatment and incompetent to stand trial, and ordered him committed to the state mental hospital. Six weeks later, the chief forensic psychiatrist informed the court that Ake had become competent to stand trial while receiving 200 milligrams of Thorazine three times daily. At a pretrial conference in June, Ake's attorney informed the court that his client would raise an insanity defense. Counsel requested that a psychiatrist examine Ake with respect to his mental condition at the time of the offense or that the court provide funds for such an examination. The trial judge denied the motion. Ake was tried for two counts of murder in the first degree and two counts of shooting with intent to kill. At the guilt phase, defense counsel called the psychiatrists who had examined Ake at the state hospital, but none testified about his mental state at the time of the offense. The jury rejected the insanity defense and returned a verdict of guilty on all counts. At the sentencing proceeding, the prosecutor relied on the testimony of the state psychiatrists that Ake was dangerous to society. Ake had no expert witness to rebut this testimony or to introduce evidence in mitigation. The jury sentenced Ake to death on each of the two murder counts and to 500 years' imprisonment on each of the two counts of shooting with intent to kill. On appeal, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the convictions and sentences. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Alvin Bernard Ford was convicted of murder in a Florida state court in 1974 and sentenced to death. There was no suggestion at the time that he was incompetent to stand trial or to be sentenced. In early 1982, while on death row, Ford began to exhibit bizarre behavior that grew more serious over time. After reading about a Ku Klux Klan rally, he developed an obsession with the Klan and delusions that he was the target of a conspiracy involving the Klan and prison guards, who he believed were holding 135 of his friends and family hostage in the prison and torturing his women relatives. He began referring to himself as Pope John Paul III and claimed to have fired prison officials and appointed new justices to the Florida Supreme Court. Ford's counsel arranged for examinations by two psychiatrists. Dr. Jamal Amin evaluated Ford over roughly 14 months using taped conversations, letters, interviews, and medical records and concluded that Ford suffered from a severe mental disease resembling paranoid schizophrenia with suicide potential. Dr. Harold Kaufman interviewed Ford in November 1983 and concluded that Ford had no understanding of why he was being executed, sincerely believed he would not be executed because he owned the prisons and could control the Governor through mind waves, and showed no signs of malingering. Pursuant to Florida Statute § 922.07, Ford's counsel invoked the state procedure for determining competency of a condemned inmate. The Governor appointed a panel of three psychiatrists who together interviewed Ford for approximately 30 minutes in the presence of eight other people. Each psychiatrist filed a separate two- or three-page report. Although the diagnoses differed, all three concluded that Ford had the mental capacity to understand the nature of the death penalty and the reasons why it was imposed on him. On April 30, 1984, the Governor signed a death warrant without explanation or statement. Ford's attorneys unsuccessfully sought a hearing in state court. They then filed a petition for habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, proffering the conflicting findings and subsequent challenges by other psychiatrists. The District Court denied the petition without a hearing. The Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

On December 28, 1973, Ernest Benjamin Smith was indicted in Texas for murder arising from his participation in the armed robbery of a grocery store during which a clerk was fatally shot by his accomplice. The State of Texas announced its intention to seek the death penalty under Art. 1257(b)(2) of the Texas Penal Code. A judge of the 195th Judicial District Court of Dallas County informally ordered the State’s attorney to arrange a psychiatric examination of Smith by Dr. James P. Grigson to determine Smith’s competency to stand trial. Dr. Grigson interviewed Smith in jail for approximately 90 minutes and concluded that he was competent to stand trial. In a letter to the trial judge that was filed with the court’s papers, Dr. Grigson reported that Smith was aware of the difference between right and wrong and able to aid an attorney in his defense. Smith was then tried by a jury and convicted of murder. Texas capital cases require bifurcated proceedings consisting of a guilt phase and a penalty phase before the same jury. At the penalty phase the jury must answer three questions on which the State bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. One of those questions asks whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence constituting a continuing threat to society. At the commencement of Smith’s sentencing hearing the State rested subject to the right to reopen. Defense counsel then presented three lay witnesses. The State called Dr. Grigson as a witness after those presentations. Defense counsel objected because Dr. Grigson’s name did not appear on the State’s witness list. In a hearing outside the jury’s presence Dr. Grigson stated that he had not obtained permission from Smith’s attorneys to examine him, that he had discussed his conclusions with the prosecutor, and that the prosecutor had requested his testimony approximately five days earlier. The trial judge denied the motion to exclude the testimony and recessed for one hour. Dr. Grigson then testified before the jury that Smith was a very severe sociopath who would continue his previous behavior, that his condition would only get worse, that he had no regard for another human being’s life or property, that no treatment would modify his behavior, that he would commit other criminal acts if given the opportunity, and that he had no remorse. This testimony rested on information derived from the 90-minute competency examination. The jury answered the three questions affirmatively, and under Texas law the death sentence was mandatory. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Smith’s conviction and death sentence. After the Supreme Court denied certiorari, Smith unsuccessfully sought a writ of habeas corpus in Texas state courts and then petitioned for relief in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The District Court vacated the death sentence. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Theon Jackson is a mentally defective deaf mute with a mental level of a pre-school child. He cannot read, write, or otherwise communicate except through limited sign language. In May 1968, at age 27, he was charged in the Criminal Court of Marion County, Indiana, with separate robberies of two women that had occurred the preceding July, involving property valued at four dollars and five dollars respectively. As the statute requires, the court appointed two psychiatrists to examine Jackson. A competency hearing was subsequently held at which petitioner was represented by counsel. At the hearing, the court received the doctors' joint report concluding that Jackson was unable to understand the nature of the charges or participate in his defense due to his communication skills, hearing loss, and mental deficiency. The doctors testified that it was extremely unlikely Jackson could ever develop the necessary skills, and the interpreter testified that Indiana had no facilities that could help someone in Jackson's condition. The trial court found that Jackson lacked comprehension sufficient to make his defense and ordered him committed to the Indiana Department of Mental Health until certified sane. Jackson's counsel filed a motion for a new trial arguing that the commitment amounted to a life sentence without conviction and deprived him of constitutional rights, but the trial court denied the motion. The Supreme Court of Indiana affirmed the denial. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. By the time of the Supreme Court's consideration, Jackson had been confined for three and one-half years on the basis of the incompetency finding.