offense. A. If the defendant intends to raise the question of mental illness or insanity at the time of the offense, the defendant shall file notice with the court no later than thirty (30) days after formal arraignment. Additionally, if the defendant is financially unable to obtain the services of a qualified mental health professional, the defendant shall file an application with the court at the time of the filing of notice of insanity defense. The procedure to be followed for review of such an application will be the same as provided in Section 1175.3 of this title. B. In cases not involving the appointment of the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System pursuant to Sections 1355 through 1370.1 of this title, if the court finds that the defendant's sanity at the time of the offense is to be a significant factor in his defense at trial and that the defendant is financially unable to obtain the services of a qualified mental health professional, the court shall provide the defendant with access to a qualified mental health professional by authorizing counsel to obtain the services of a
qualified mental health professional to conduct an appropriate examination and assist in evaluation, preparation and presentation of the defense. Compensation for such services shall be paid by the court fund, as authorized by Section 1304 of Title 20 of the Oklahoma Statutes. C. As used in this section, "qualified mental health professional" means an individual certified or licensed in this state to practice psychiatry, psychology, professional counseling, or social work. Added by Laws 1985, c. 232, § 2, emerg. eff. July 8, 1985. Amended by Laws 1991, c. 238, § 36, eff. July 1, 1991; Laws 2009, c. 239, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2009.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases, 1987–1997 · leading case:
State v. Barnett, 909 S.W.2d 423 (Tenn. 1995).
State v. Barnett, 909 S.W.2d 423 (Tenn. 1995).
· cites it 2× “§ 15A-959; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 22, § 1176 . [6] Because resolution of the issues in this case clearly are governed by the Due Process Clause of the federal constitution, we need not at this time consider the protection afforded by Art.”
Allen v. State, 1997 OK CR 44, 944 P.2d 934.
· cites it 4× “Title 22 O.S.1991, § 1176 requires a defendant to file a written application at least twenty (20) days before trial if he intends to use the insanity defense.”
Harjo v. State, 882 P.2d 1067 (Okla. Crim. App. 1994).
· cites it 2× “1985, § 464(B), which was subsequently repealed and replaced by 22 O.S.Supp. 1991, § 1176 effective July 1, 1991.”
Miller v. State, 751 P.2d 733 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “8 and 22 O.S.Supp.1987, § 1176 apply only to those accused of a crime.”
Castro v. State, 745 P.2d 394 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987).
“See 22 O.S.Supp.1985, § 1176(A). The procedure to follow for review of such an application is the same as that provided in 22 O.”
Mills v. Tulsa Cnty. Dist. Court, 770 P.2d 900 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989).
“Petitioner has filed Notice of Intent of Insanity Defense pursuant to 22 O.S.Supp. 1988, § 1176 and has submitted to psychiat *901 ric examination by a psychiatrist chosen by the State.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 1176(A): 1 case
Castro v. State, 745 P.2d 394 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987).
“See 22 O.S.Supp.1985, § 1176(A). The procedure to follow for review of such an application is the same as that provided in 22 O.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 1176(a): 1 case
Allen v. State, 1997 OK CR 44, 944 P.2d 934.
“Title 22 O.S.1991, § 1176 requires a defendant to file a written application at least twenty (20) days before trial if he intends to use the insanity 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.