Dr. Kirkorsky is a Forensic Psychiatry Fellow at the University of California-Davis. Dr. Shao is a Forensic Psychiatrist practicing in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Bloom is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Arizona, College of Medicine-Phoenix.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2019 Jun;47(2):217-223. doi: 10.29158/JAAPL.003834-19. Epub 2019 Apr 26.
Arizona's insanity defense and post-insanity procedures have evolved over the last 30 years into a unique system. Arizona moved from a typical M'Naughten-based insanity defense to an adaptation of the Oregon Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) model and then to its current form, in which the PSRB is cast in a correctional framework. These changes have resulted in a correctional statute, with outcomes that may subject the guilty except insane (GEI) offender to a disposition similar to that of someone found guilty but mentally ill (GBMI). We review the literature on the GBMI defense first developed in Michigan in the 1970s and compare Arizona's current system to the earlier GBMI models. We conclude with a discussion of Arizona's GEI verdict and implications of managing these offenders in a correctional framework, resulting in a modified GBMI statute.
亚利桑那州的精神错乱辩护和精神错乱后程序在过去 30 年中发展成为一个独特的系统。亚利桑那州从典型的基于 M'Naughten 的精神错乱辩护转变为俄勒冈州精神病安全审查委员会 (PSRB) 模式的适应,然后发展到目前的形式,其中 PSRB 被置于矫正框架中。这些变化导致了一项矫正法规,其结果可能使无罪但精神错乱(GEI)的罪犯受到类似于被判有罪但精神错乱(GBMI)的人的处置。我们首先回顾了 20 世纪 70 年代在密歇根州首次开发的 GBMI 辩护的文献,并将亚利桑那州目前的制度与早期的 GBMI 模式进行了比较。最后,我们讨论了亚利桑那州的 GEI 判决以及在矫正框架中管理这些罪犯的影响,导致了修改后的 GBMI 法规。