Mentally Ill Defendants Get More Legal Protection

The Supreme Court on Tuesday raised the level of constitutional protection for criminal defendants with mental illness or retardation, ruling unanimously that it would violate the fundamental right to a fair trial for a state to proceed against any defendant who, more likely than not, was mentally incompetent.

The decision set aside a death sentence for a convicted murderer and had the effect of invalidating laws in four states - Oklahoma, where the case originated, as well as Connecticut, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania - that require “clear and convincing evidence” before a defendant can be ruled incompetent to stand trial.

This is an exacting standard of proof, just below the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard required for conviction of a crime.

Overturning a 1995 ruling by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, which upheld that state’s high standard, the Supreme Court held Tuesday that under the constitutional guarantee of due process, a “preponderance of the evidence” is all that can be required to demonstrate incompetence.