When a defendant intends to raise lack of criminal responsibility as a defense in a prosecution or put in issue his or her fitness to proceed, the defendant shall notify the prosecutor and the court at the earliest practicable time.
Failure to notify the prosecutor within a reasonable time before the trial date entitles the prosecutor to a continuance that for limitation purposes is deemed an excluded period granted on application of the defendant.
Alternatively, in lieu of suspending any further proceedings under § 5-2-328, the court may order the immediate examination of the defendant at a designated receiving facility or program by an expert.
Amendments.
The 2017 amendment substituted “lack of criminal responsibility” for “mental disease or defect” in (a); and, in (b)(2), substituted “§ 5-2-328” for “§ 5-2-305” and “an expert” for “a qualified psychiatrist or a qualified psychologist”.
Cross References.
Plea of insanity when period before trial short or insanity alleged after charge, § 16-86-108.
Case Notes
Failure to Give Timely Notice.
The defendant was not improperly denied his right to present a defense of mental disease or defect or alternatively to put on psychiatric testimony to negate the element of intent where (1) he had not formally raised the defense as late as one day before trial, but instead stated that he reserved the right to raise the insanity defense until he could cross-examine a physician who had indicated that the defendant might show signs of mental illness, and (2) the trial judge had directed the defendant to give notice of such affirmative defense 10 days before trial, but he chose not to do so, and only did so midway into the state's case. Copeland v. State, 343 Ark. 327, 37 S.W.3d 567 (2001).
Notice.
Circuit court acted without jurisdiction in ordering defendant to submit to a criminal responsibility examination because defendant had not filed a notice of intent to raise the defense of not guilty for reason of mental disease or defect.
Friar v. Erwin, 2014 Ark. 487, 450 S.W.3d 666 (2014).
Davasher v. State, 823 S.W.2d 863 (Ark. 1992). · cites it 4ד§ 5-2-304. b. Once the defendant files notice of a mental-disease defense, the trial court orders a psychiatric examination.”
Haynes v. State, 58 S.W.3d 336 (Ark. 2001). · cites it 2דHaynes filed a notice on August 24, 2000, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-304 (Repl. 1997), asserting that he intended to rely on the affirmative defense of mental disease or defect.”
King v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 81 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4דArk.Code Ann. § 5-2-304. Accordingly, appellant submits that the penalty for untimely notice is more time — charged to the defendant — for the State to prepare for the newly revealed defense.”
Scott v. State, 989 S.W.2d 891 (Ark. 1999). · cites it 4דSection 5-2-305(a) provides in pertinent part that whenever a defendant charged in circuit court files notice that he will rely upon the defense of mental disease or defect or that he will put in issue his fitness to *893 proceed, the trial court "shall immediately suspend all…”
Jimenez v. State, 379 S.W.3d 762 (Ark. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6ד” Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-304 (emphasis added).”
Key v. State, 923 S.W.2d 865 (Ark. 1996). · cites it 2דWendaU Hall, a psychiatrist at the state hospital, filed a report with the court finding that appellant appeared to be aware of the nature of the charges and the proceedings taken against him and was capable of cooperating effectively with an attorney in the preparation of his…”
Addison v. State, 765 S.W.2d 566 (Ark. 1989). · cites it 2דUpon suspension of proceedings, the court shall enter an order appointing at least one qualified psychiatrist to make an examination and report on the mental condition of the defendant. Ark.”
Copeland v. State, 37 S.W.3d 567 (Ark. 2001). · cites it 2דFirst, under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-304 (a) (Repl. 1997), whenever a defendant intends to raise mental disease or defect as a defense in a prosecution or put in issue his fitness to proceed, he must notify the prosecutor and the court at the earliest practicable time.”
Hudson v. State, 799 S.W.2d 529 (Ark. 1990). · cites it 2דcourt: (1) Files notice that he intends to rely upon the defense of mental disease or *531 defect, or there is reason to believe that mental disease or defect of the defendant will or has become an issue in the cause; or (2) Files notice that he will put in issue his fitness to…”
Smith v. Fox, 193 S.W.3d 238 (Ark. 2004). “cuit court: (1) Files notice that he intends to rely upon the defense of mental disease or defect, or there is reason to believe that mental disease or defect of the defendant will or has become an issue in the cause; or (2) Files notice that he will put in issue his fitness to…”
Terry Ex Rel. Terry v. Hill, 232 F. Supp. 2d 934 (E.D. Ark. 2002). “1997) provides: (a)(1) The [circuit] court, subject to the provisions of §§ 5-2-304 and 5-2-311, shall immediately suspend all further proceedings in the prosecution whenever: (A) A defendant charged in circuit court files notice that he or she intends to rely upon the defense…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.