WASHINGTON - Several Supreme Court justices suggested Wednesday that defendants with a history of mental illness can be judged competent to stand trial or plead guilty, yet forfeit their constitutional right to represent themselves.

The court heard arguments in a case from Indiana in which a judge prevented a defendant from acting as his own lawyer at trial out of concern that the proceedings would become a farce.

Justice Stephen Breyer said that allowing judges' discretion in those cases could increase public confidence in the criminal justice system and reduce the number of "very disturbed people ending up in prison because they are disturbed, not because they're guilty."

Ahmad Edwards was convicted of attempted murder and other charges in 2005 for a shooting six years earlier at an Indianapolis department store.

He was initially found to be schizophrenic and suffering from delusions and spent most of the five years following the shooting in state psychiatric facilities. But by 2005, he was judged competent to stand trial.

Edwards asked to represent himself. A judge denied the request because he was concerned that Edwards' trial would not be fair. Edwards, represented by a lawyer, was convicted anyway and sentenced to 30 years in prison.

He appealed, and Indiana courts agreed that his right to represent himself had been violated, citing a U.S. high court decision from 1993. The courts overturned his conviction and ordered a new trial.

The justices appeared to be concerned with the difficulty trial judges would face if forced to allow defendants like Edwards to represent themselves.

Even if a judge could step in once the trial was under way and order a lawyer to mount a defense, "the damage is done" by that point, Justice David Souter said.

Mark Stancil, representing Edwards, said that once a judge decides that someone can be tried, "I think you have to give him a chance to stand up in open court."

After all, Stancil said, Edwards could have entered a guilty plea without raising any constitutional concerns.

Only Justice Antonin Scalia appeared strongly on Edwards' side of the defendant.

"He can plead guilty if he wishes and that's OK," Scalia said. "Only he can't put on an incompetent defense?...The state still has to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher said the right to self-representation is not absolute. "It is within the state's authority to override self-representation when the defendant can't communicate coherently," Fisher said.

Scalia shot back, "I sometimes think lawyers can't communicate coherently."

The record of the case is filled with confusing or incomprehensible writings from Edwards that the judge and Indiana officials said bolstered their position.

Stancil said at other times, though, that Edwards provided lucid answers to legal questions from the judge.

Justice Anthony Kennedy was not impressed by Stancil's observation. "There are all kinds of nuts who can get 90 percent on the bar exam," Kennedy said.

Defendants may be ruled competent to stand trial if they understand the proceedings and are capable of assisting their lawyer. The question in this case is whether states may impose a higher standard for measuring a defendant's competency to be his own lawyer.

The high court recently saw an aspect of this dilemma in the case of Scott Panetti, a mentally ill killer from Texas who was nonetheless judged competent to stand trial and allowed to represent himself.

Panetti was convicted and sentenced to death after personally arguing that only an insane person could prove the insanity defense. He dressed in cowboy clothing and submitted an initial witness list that included Jesus Christ and John F. Kennedy.

The court blocked his execution in June, in a ruling that did not address his role in his own defense.

A decision is expected by summer.

The case is Indiana v. Edwards, 07-208.

PsycPORT® is a product of the American Psychological Association created to provide quick access to mass-media information related to psychology.
®2008 American Psychological Association
Last updated: 04/25/2008 - 09:06 AM