Portage County Legal News

Bill to thwart death penalty sentences for mentally ill has yet to progress

KEITH ARNOLD
Special to the Legal News
Published: August 22, 2017

A bipartisan Senate effort that would scuttle death penalty sentences imposed against the mentally ill remains tied up in committee as lawmakers enjoy the final weeks of a summer recess.

Senate Bill 40 would provide that a person convicted of aggravated murder who demonstrates that he had a serious mental illness at the time of committing the offense cannot be sentenced to death for the offense.

Additionally, the bill - jointly sponsored by Sens. John Eklund, a Republican of Chardon, and Sandra Williams, a Cleveland Democrat - would provide a mechanism for resentencing to a life sentence such an individual when previously sentenced to death and who proves that he had a serious mental illness at the time of committing the offense.

"Conditions that influence an individual's mental state at the time he or she commits a crime can affect how voluntary and reliable an individual's statements are, can compromise a person's competence to stand trial and competence to waive his or her rights and may have an effect upon a person's knowledge of the criminal justice system," Williams told fellow senators seated on the Judiciary Committee. "Individuals diagnosed with a mental illness should not be executed or sentenced to death if, at the time of the offense, they had significant limitations in both their intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior, as expressed in social, conceptual and practical adaptive skills, resulting from bipolar disorder, delusional disorder, schizophrenia, dementia or major depressive disorder."

Capital cases are some of the most delicate and procedurally complicated cases that exits in the criminal justice system, Kari Bloom of the Ohio Public Defender's Office posited. If the state continues to maintain capital punishment, she added, lawmakers must remain engaged and ready to identify concerns relative to inhumane treatment of some of the most vulnerable citizens of the state.

"The serious mental illnesses included in SB 40 are not intellectual disabilities, formerly (known as) mental retardation," Bloom continued. "They may be fully competent and aware of the process, and likely won't be found not guilty by reason of insanity. ...

"It is highly offensive to the criminal justice system to prosecute someone who is deemed to be insane. The courts have told us that executing children and those who are intellectually disabled offends justice and disrupts the purpose of capital punishment, but those folks can still be prosecuted and convicted. That is where the need for SB 40 comes - for those who suffer from a serious mental illness, making their crimes less deserving of the harshest punishment our state can impose."

Opponents of the measure, including the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association, argue that the measure is duplicative and that both state and federal law have addressed the issue.

More problematic is the bill's expansion of unnecessary mental illness considerations, said the association's Executive Director John Murphy.

"The mental conditions are too broad and ill defined," he told committee members. "While some include conditions that are quite serious, of course, they also include depression, thought disorders, lack of motivation, lack of ability to focus and concentrate, mood swings, feelings of sadness, anxiety, guilt, anger, isolation, (and) hopelessness.

"While these issues could be raised as factors in mitigation, the are too indefinite and amorphous to form the basis of a presumption against the death penalty."

SB 40 was drafted in response to the findings of an Ohio Supreme Court Joint Task Force, according to the bill's sponsors.

Eklund reckoned the bill would allow for fair administration of the law.

"The bill will not allow the defendant to escape punishment: (A) defendant still may be found guilty and imprisoned," he said. "However, it would prohibit the execution of those who had a prior diagnosis of serious mental illness and who, at the time of the offense, were significantly impaired by reason of that serious mental illness in their ability to appreciate the nature, consequences or wrongfulness of his or her conduct, to exercise rational judgment in relation to his or her conduct or to conform his or her conduct to legal requirements."

Six senators have signed on as cosponsors of the bill, which had not been scheduled for a fourth hearing at the time of publication.

[Back]