Ineffective Assistance, Rights Waiver

Iannarelli v. Young, 904 N.W.2d 82 (S.D. 2017)

The Supreme Court of South Dakota upheld a sentence because the defendant waived his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and he did not receive ineffective counsel either by failure to warn the defendant of his Fifth Amendment right prior to a psychological evaluation or by failure to request a hearing to determine if institutionalization may be appropriate.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Mental Health Providers, Privilege

Bradley v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., 405 P.3d 668 (Nev. 2017)

The Supreme Court of Nevada ruled that psychologist-patient privilege applied and was not waived where counseling records concerned only treatment and no substantial part was shared with anyone, treatment was not substantively at issue in any claim or defense, and neither state law, due process, nor the right to confrontation required disclosure.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Civil Commitment, Rights Waiver

Matter of S.M., 403 P.3d 324 (Mont. 2017)

The Supreme Court of Montana upheld a statute preventing defendants from being able to waive their right to counsel in civil commitment proceedings, finding it does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Intellectual Disability, Death penalty

State v. Russell, 238 So.3d 1105 (Miss. 2017)

The Supreme Court of Mississippi found that the trial court was incorrect in denying a State motion to evaluate a defendant on his claim of intellectual disability when considering the death penalty because testing completed for a previous charge was insufficient for State expert to form opinion.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Mental Health Experts, Jury Instructions, Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity

Commonwealth v. Piantedosi, 87 N.E.3d 549 (Mass. 2017)

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld a conviction of first-degree murder because the judge correctly excluded expert testimony about a hearsay conversation not admitted into evidence, the Commonwealth’s expert witness testimony was proper, and the judge accurately instructed the jury with the appropriate model instructions at the time of the trial.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Death Penalty, Ineffective Assistance, Intellectual Disability

State v. Morrison, 236 So.3d 204 (Fla. 2017)

The Supreme Court of Florida denied a new evidentiary hearing for intellectual disability, granted a new penalty phase where counsel was ineffective in its penalty phase investigation, and withheld a new guilt phase because counsel was not ineffective in its guilt phase investigation.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Death Penalty, Ineffective Assistance

Ellerbee v. State, 232 So.3d 909 (Fla. 2017)

The Supreme Court of Florida vacated a death sentence and granted a new penalty phase to the defendant because his counsel did not provide effective assistance at trial and the non-unanimous jury verdict regarding the sentence may have violated the Sixth Amendment.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Competence to Stand Trial, Prosecutor

Jackson v. Superior Court, 406 P.3d 782 (Cal. 2017)

The Supreme Court of California found that the prosecution was permitted to dismiss prior charges and refile identical charges where the defendant had been committed for the duration of the statutory period while being evaluated for competence to stand trial; provided, however, that if found still incompetent to stand trial, the defendant could not be re-committed for another statutory period.

Found in DMHL Volume 37, Issue 1

Hospital Not Liable for Disappearance of Mentally Ill Daughter Even Though Mother Only Left Her Alone for 45-Minute Meeting with Counselor Because Nurse Promised to Look After Daughter

Nash v. Sisters of Providence, No. 28295-0-11, 2003 WL 21791593 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 5, 2003); 12(33) BNA's Health Law Reporter 1278 (Aug. 14, 2003)

A Washington Court of Appeals ruled that a hospital could not be held liable for the promise made to a mother by a nurse to look after her mentally ill 15-year-old daughter while the mother conferred with a counselor. The family's physician had arranged for the daughter to be evaluated at the hospital after he concluded the daughter showed symptoms similar to the manic phase of a manic­ depressive disorder.  The mother took her daughter to the hospital's emergency room where the hospital's notes indicated the daughter was acting "manic and paranoid," had a six-month history of depression and mania, and her status was "urgent."  The hospital's crisis services counselor asked to meet privately with the mother.  When the mother said she did not want to leave her daughter alone in an examination room, the counselor asked a nurse from the nurses' station across the hallway to watch the daughter.  The nurse explained she could watch the room from a video monitor. Finding this acceptable, the mother left to meet with the counselor in another room. When they returned 45 minutes later, the daughter was gone. The nurse said she had left her station to administer an l.V. to another patient. The parents have not seen their daughter since then...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

Attorneys' Fees Available When Executor or Trustee Engages in Undue Influence

In re Trust Created March 31, 1992 (Niles Trust), No. A- 7/8 (N.J. 2003); 71(47) U.S. Law Week 1748-49 (June 10, 2003)

In New Jersey, a wealthy unmarried woman placed her assets in three trusts.  She named as beneficiaries a foundation and her brother, who was two years younger than his sister.  A long-time friend was named as trustee. However, the woman, who had dementia and other medical problems, subsequently replaced the trustee with the son of her brother's recent much younger bride.  The son was also named executor of the woman's will. The trusts and the will were then modified to confer substantial benefits on the sister-in-law, her son, and her son's children.  The sister-in­ law and her son also used the woman's assets to buy luxury items.  The former trustee and the foundation filed suit claiming that the sister-in-law and her son had unduly influenced the woman to change her will and trusts...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

Missouri Supreme Court Bans Execution of Juvenile Offenders

State ex rel. Simmons v. Roper, 112 S.W.3d 397 (Mo. 2003); 72(9) U.S. Law Week 1143-44 (Sept. 16, 2003)

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the execution of defendants who were juveniles when they committed their offense is barred by the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.  Applying the analysis used by the U.S. Supreme Court in Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the court concluded that evolving standards of decency have similarly led to a national consensus opposing juvenile executions.  The court asserted that if the U.S. Supreme Court were to review its decision from 14 years ago in Stanford v. Kentucky (1989), it would rule that "evolving standards of decency" mandate that the execution of 16- and 17-year-old offenders be found unconstitutional...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

Connecticut Supreme Court Applies Sell to Determination of Whether Defendant Can Be Forcibly Treated to Restore Competence

State v. Jacobs, 828 A.2d 587 (Conn. 2003)

The Supreme Court of Connecticut has issued one of the first appellate opinions applying the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Sell v. United States (2003) to a determination of whether involuntary medication can be authorized to render a defendant competent to stand trial.  The defendant was charged with breach of the peace, simple trespass, assault of a peace officer, carrying a dangerous weapon, and interference with an officer, which carried a combined maximum punishment of 14 years.  Subsequent to the defendant being found incompetent to stand trial, the trial court ordered treatment with psychotropic medication to restore the defendant's competence to stand trial.  The defendant appealed, claiming forced medication would violate his constitutional rights under the first amendment (i.e., his right to free speech or the right to free thought and communication), sixth amendment (i.e., his right to a fair trial), and fourteenth amendment (i.e., his interest in privacy or liberty).  The state argued this question was limited to whether the defendant's fourteenth amendment rights were infringed...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege in California Protects Psychotherapy Records from Disclosure Even When Therapy Only Commenced Because It Was a Condition of Probation

Story v. Superior Court, 135 Cal. Rptr. 2d 532 (2003); 72(2) U.S. Law Week 1032 (July. 15, 2003)

A California Court of Appeal held that California's psychotherapist-patient  privilege may be asserted to block the release of a criminal defendant's  psychotherapy  records even though those records pertain to therapy into which the defendant entered only because it was made a condition of probation. After the defendant was charged with murder during the course of a rape and burglary, the state sought a court order to release the defendant's psychotherapy records.  In a case of first impression in California, the court ruled the defendant was a "patient" for purpose of this privilege regardless of why he entered treatment and was therefore entitled to raise this privilege in blocking the state's request for records...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

California Tax on Cigarettes to Fund Anti­ Tobacco Ads Upheld

R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Banta, 272 F. Supp. 2d 1085 (E.D. Cal. 2003); 72(4) U.S. Law Week 1060-61 (Aug. 5, 2003)

A California law that directed a state agency to develop a media program to discourage tobacco use with funding provided by a surtax on wholesale cigarette sales was upheld by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.  California voters in 1988 enacted a 25¢ per pack surtax with the revenue placed in a limited-use fund, a portion of which is used for the media campaign. Various tobacco companies challenged the law, asserting that the state annually spends $25 million on anti-smoking ads and the surtax compels them to fund speech with which they disagree...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

Oklahoma May Violate the ADA by Imposing a Five-Prescription Per Month Cap on Medicaid Recipients Receiving Services at Home

Fisher v. Oklahoma Health Care Auth., 335 F.3d 1175 (10th Cir. 2003); 72(4) U.S. Law Week 1056 (Aug. 5, 2003)

Oklahoma may be violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by imposing a five­ prescription per month cap on Medicaid recipients who receive their state-funded services at home rather than in a nursing facility.  Oklahoma, as part of an optional federal Medicaid waiver program in which it participates, allows individuals who meet the level of care required for institutionalization in a nursing facility to live at home and receive state-funded medical care.  Until September 2002, participants were entitled to an unlimited number of state-paid medically necessary prescriptions.  At that point, responding to a budgetary shortfall, the cap was put into operation, although patients in nursing facilities continued to receive unlimited prescriptions.  The state anticipated that capping the number of prescriptions available would save the state $3.2 million...

Found in DMHL Volume 23 Issue 1

Connecticut Physicians Who Submitted Reports About the Competence of a Psychiatrist to Practice Safely Were Not Entitled to Absolute Immunity

Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hosp., 865 A.2d 1163 (Conn. 2005)

State licensing boards or a corresponding legislatively designated agency typically have the authority to investigate licensed practitioners and to discipline them for unprofessional conduct.  However, these boards and agencies generally have limited resources to engage in routine surveillance of the activities of licensed practitioners and generally do not undertake an investigation unless a report of unprofessional conduct has been filed with them...

Found in DMHL Volume 24 Issue 2

New York Antidiscrimination Insurance Law Does Not Require Parity in Coverage for Physical and Mental Disabilities

In re Polan v. New York Ins. Dep't, 814 N.E.2d 789 (NY 2004)

Efforts have been launched across the country to enhance the benefits available to individuals with a mental illness under employer-provided health care plans.  Such plans often include long-term disability insurance coverage that provides income or other benefits for an employee that becomes disabled.  For a physical disability, this coverage may last as long as the disability continues or until the age of 65 when Social Security and Medicare benefits become available.  For a mental disability, however, this coverage may be limited to a given period of time, such as two years, notwithstanding that the mental disability may be chronic and leaves the individual unable to work...

Found in DMHL Volume 24 Issue 1

NM Permits Defendant to Assert at Pretrial Hearing That Mental Retardation Precludes Death Penalty; If Not Established at This Hearing, Defendant Can Introduce Related Evidence During Sentencing Phase

State v. Flores, 93 P.3d 1264 (2004)

State courts continue to wrestle with the implementation of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), which established that a mentally retarded defendant cannot receive the death penalty under the Constitution....

Found in DMHL Volume 24 Issue 1

Arkansas Court Finds That Nursing Home Negligence and Malpractice Warrants Significant Compensatory and Punitive Damages; Supreme Court Declines Review

Advocat, Inc. vs. Sauer, 111 S.W.3d 346 (Ark. 2003), cert. denied, 124 S. Ct. 532 (U.S. 2003)

 

A nursing home resident in Arkansas suffering from Alzheimer's  Disease died from severe malnutrition and dehydration.  There was considerable evidence that the resident did not receive proper care and suffered considerably; that the misconduct involved repeated actions; that the facility, part of a large chain of assisted living facilities, was short-staffed to maximize profits and this practice continued even after complaints by staff members, patients, and family members; and that efforts were made to conceal deficiencies, including bringing in extra employees on state-inspection days...

Found in DMHL Volume 24 Issue 1

Missouri Court Rules Individual Need Not Be Competent Before a Sexually Violent Predator Commitment Hearing Can Be Held; Supreme Court Declines Review

Missouri v. Kinder, 129 S.W.3d 5 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003), cert. denied, 125 S. Ct. 480 (2004)

Many states in recent years have enacted laws that permit convicted sexual offenders to be civilly committed as a sexually violent predator upon the completion of their criminal sentence.  It is well established that a criminal defendant must be competent to stand trial before the defendant can be convicted...

Found in DMHL Volume 24 Issue 1