Skip to main content
Log in

The insanity defense in Shelby County, Tennessee

  • Published:
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was threefold: to document the number of cases in Shelby County, Tennessee where an insanity defense was possible: to follow cases through to disposition to determine what percentage of defendants use the defense successfully; and to examine the type of charges for insanity cases. Of the 25.000 individuals processed through the Criminal Courts. 685 (2.7%) were referred for insanity evaluations and 45 defendants (6.6%) were returned to the court with a recommendation from the Midtown Mental Health Center's Forensic Team that an insanity defense was possible. Of the 45 insanity defendants identified, 49% (n=22) pleaded guilty, 31% (n=14) went to trial, and 20% (n=9) were dismissed. Overall, 22% (n=10) of the insanity defendants were adjudicated not guilty by reason of insanity. Thus, of all defendants processed (25,000), 04% (n=11) were adjucated not guilty by reason of insanity. While no one type of offense predominated, two general categories were observed: murder and related offenses (33%) and property crimes (27%). The findings are discussed with reference to procedures for handling insanity cases in Tennessee and the position that extreme caution should be exercised before investing substantial resources to effect sweeping changes in laws that effect so few criminal defendants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Law Institute Model Penal Code § 4.01 (1962).

  • Graham v. State, 547 S.W. 2d, 531 (1977).

  • The Insanity Defense. (1982).Mental Disability Law Reporter, 6, 219.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Insanity Defense (1983).Mental Health Law Reporter, 10, 1.

  • Keilitz, I. (1984, February). The insanity defense: New developments and the abolitionist drive. In I. Keilitz (Principal Speaker).The criminal process. Session B conducted at the conference on Mental Health Law: Developments in the 1980s. Miami. Fl.

  • Pasewark, R.A., & Pantle, M.A. (1979). Insanity plea: Legistator's view.American Journal of Psychiatry, 136, 222–223.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pasewark, R.A., Seidenzahl, D., & Pantle, M.A. (1981). Opinions about the insanity plea.Journal of Forensic Psychiatry.8, 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zawitz, M.A., Mina, T.R., Kuykendall, C.M., Greenfield, L.A., & White, J.L. (1983). The response to crime: Adjudication. In M.W. Zawitz (Ed.),Report to the nation on crime and justice: The data Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. NCJ-87068. p. 68.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krupicka, L.A., Zager, L.D. & Hutson, J.R. The insanity defense in Shelby County, Tennessee. JPCP 1, 24–31 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02823246

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02823246

Keywords

Navigation