The legislative structuring of insanity acquittee policies

Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 166-177

  Linhorst, Donald M ^a  

^a St Louis State Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; LAW; MENTAL DISEASE; MENTAL HEALTH CARE; UNITED STATES;

CRIMINAL LAW; HEALTH POLICY; INSANITY DEFENSE; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; MISSOURI; POLICY MAKING; SAFETY;

EID: 0030872809     PISSN: 10943412     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/bf02898511     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Lester JP, Bowman AO'M, Goggin ML, et al.: Public policy implementation: Evolution of the field and agenda for future research. Policy Studies Review 1987; 7(1):200-216.
2. Linder SH, Peters BG: A design perspective on policy implementation: The fallacies of misplaced prescription. Policy Studies Review 1987; 6(3):459-475.
3. Elmore RF: Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. In: Williams W, Elmore RF (Eds.): Studying Implementation: Methodological and Administrative Issues. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House, 1982, pp. 18-35.
4. Mazmanian DA, Sabatier PA: Implementation and Public Policy. Second ed. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1989.
5. O'Toole, LJ Jr.: Policy recommendations for multi-actor implementation: An assessment of the field. Journal of Public Policy 1986;6(2):181-210.
6. Sabatier PA: Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy 1986; 6:21-48.
7. LaFond JQ, Durham ML: Back to the Asylum: The Future of Mental Health and Policy in the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
8. McGinley H, Pasewark RA: National survey of the frequency and success of the insanity plea and alternate pleas. Journal of Law and Psychiatry 1989; 17(2):205-221.
9. Way BB, Dvoskin JA, Steadman HJ: Forensic psychiatric inpatients served in the United States: Regional and system differences. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law 1991; 19(4):405-412.
10. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1995. c. 552.
11. Sabatier P, Mazmanian D: The conditions of effective implementation: A guide to accomplishing policy objectives. Policy Analysis 1979; 5:481-504.
12. Brakel SJ: After the verdict: Dispositional decisions regarding criminal defendants acquitted by reason of insanity. De Paul Law Review 1988; 37:181-258.
13. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1995. sec. 552.040.
14. Swafford S: County prosecutors seek to overturn "conditional release" law. Fulton Sun, July 10, 1988.
15. Bryant T: Nixon seeks tougher rules for those who plead insanity. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 16, 1996.
16. Justice and mental health. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 24, 1996.
17. Poythress NG, Miller RD: The treatment of forensic patients: Major issues. In: Shah SA, Sales BD (Eds.): Law and Mental Health: Major Developments and Research Needs. DHHS Pub. No. (ADM) 91-1875. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1991, pp. 81-113.
18. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1984. sec. 552.040.1.
19. Callahan L, Mayer C, Steadman HJ: Insanity defense reform in the United States - Post-Hinckley. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter 1987; 10(1):54-59.
20. Petrella RC, Benedek EP, Bank SC, et al.: Examining the application of the guilty but mentally ill verdict in Michigan. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1985; 36(3):254-259.
21. Steadman HJ, McGreevy MA, Morrissey JP, et al.: Before and After Hinckley: Evaluating Insanity Defense Reform. New York: Guilford, 1993.
22. Dirks-Linhorst PA, Linhorst DM: Developing and implementing a statewide plan for forensic services. Administration and Policy in Mental Health 1994; 21(6):537-544.
23. Halleck NH, Petrila J: Risk management in forensic services. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 1988; 11:347-358.
24. Linhorst DM: Implementing psychosocial rehabilitation in long-term inpatient psychiatric facilities. Journal of Mental Health Administration 1995; 22(1):58-67.
25. Woodin D: Prosecutor knew of hospital's plan to release patient. Joplin Globe, October 24, 1986.
26. Judge denies freedom to rapist in state hospital. Springfield News, December 28, 1988.
27. Mickenberg I: A pleasant surprise: The guilty but mentally ill verdict has both succeeded in its own right and successfully preserved the traditional role of the insanity defense. Cincinnati Law Review 1987; 55(4):943-996.
28. McClellan DS: The New York State Insanity Defense Act of 1980: A legislative experiment. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law 1989; 17(2):129-151.
29. Weiner BA: Interfaces between the mentalhealth and criminal justice system: The legal perspective. In: Teplin LA (Ed.): Mental Health and Criminal Justice. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1984, pp. 21-41.
30. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1994. sec. 552.040.18.
31. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1994. sec. 552.040.15.
32. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1994. sec. 552.040.16.
33. McGreevy MA, Steadman HJ, Callahan LA: The negligible effects of California's 1982 reform of the insanity defense test. American Journal of Psychiatry 1991; 148(6):744-750.
34. Pasewark RA, Randolph RL, Bieber S: Insanity plea: Statutory language and trial procedures. The Journal of Psychiatry and Law 1984; 12(3):399-422.
35. Callahan LA, Steadman HJ: Insanity defense reform in Ohio: Does the court of jurisdiction matter? Capital University Law Review 1990; 19(3):809-824.
36. Revised Statutes of Missouri. 1993. sec. 595.209.7.
37. Ellis JW: The consequences of the insanity defense: Proposals to reform post-acquittal commitment laws. Catholic University Law Review 1986; 35:961-1020.
38. Skok ES: Policy issue networks and the public policy cycle: A structural-functional approach. Public Administration Review 1995; 55(4):325-332.
39. Linhorst DM, Dirks-Linhorst PA: The impact of insanity acquittees on Missouri's public mental health system. Law and Human Behavior in press.