onecle - legal research

Court Opinions

State Laws

US Code

US Constitution

Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71, 31 (1992)

Legal Research Home > United States Supreme Court > 504 U.S. > Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71, 31 (1992)

Page:   Index   Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Next

74

FOUCHA v. LOUISIANA

Opinion of the Court

guish right from wrong and was insane at the time of the offense.1 On October 12, 1984, the trial court ruled that Foucha was not guilty by reason of insanity, finding that he "is unable to appreciate the usual, natural and probable consequences of his acts; that he is unable to distinguish right from wrong; that he is a menace to himself and others; and that he was insane at the time of the commission of the above crimes and that he is presently insane." Id., at 6. He was committed to the East Feliciana Forensic Facility until such time as doctors recommend that he be released, and until further order of the court. In 1988, the superintendent of Feliciana recommended that Foucha be discharged or released. A three-member panel was convened at the institution to determine Foucha's current condition and whether he could be released or placed on probation without being a danger to others or himself. On March 21, 1988, the panel reported that there had been no evidence of mental illness since admission and recommended that Foucha be conditionally discharged.2 The trial judge appointed a two-member sanity commission made up of the same two doctors who had conducted the pretrial examination. Their written report stated that Foucha "is presently in remission from mental illness [but] [w]e cannot certify that he would not constitute

1 Louisiana law provides: "If the circumstances indicate that because of a mental disease or mental defect the offender was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong with reference to the conduct in question, the offender shall be exempt from criminal responsibility." La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 14:14 (West 1986). Justice Kennedy disregards the fact that the State makes no claim that Foucha was criminally responsible or that it is entitled to punish Foucha as a criminal.

2 The panel unanimously recommended that petitioner be conditionally discharged with recommendations that he (1) be placed on probation; (2) remain free from intoxicating and mind-altering substances; (3) attend a substance abuse clinic on a regular basis; (4) submit to regular and random urine drug screening; and (5) be actively employed or seeking employment. App. 10-11.

Although the panel recited that it was charged with determining dangerousness, its report did not expressly make a finding in that regard.

Page:   Index   Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007