That's what the Ohio Court of Appeals (State v.
Daley<http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2011/2011-ohio-3584.pdf>,
decided yesterday) said happened in the court below; the appellate court
reversed the trial court's mental incompetence finding.
Daley was charged in March 2010 with retaliation, intimidation, aggravated
menacing, menacing, and telecommunications harassment. The charges stemmed from
allegedly threatening voicemail messages left by Daley on the telephone
messaging system of an employee of the Cuyahoga County Support Enforcement
Agency ("CSEA"). The charges also stemmed from an allegedly threatening letter
written by Daley to the CSEA employee.
The trial court referred Daley to the court's psychiatric clinic for a
competency evaluation and a hearing was held on same. The evaluating
psychiatrist, Dr. Stephen Noffsinger, diagnosed Daley with psychotic disorder,
not otherwise specified, and opined that Daley was not competent to stand trial
because he was not able to assist in his defense. Daley declined an independent
evaluation.
Daley testified at the competency hearing that he had been and was able to
continue assisting his attorney in his defense. He also testified that his
descriptions of the American legal system, such as his description of divorce
court as the "high court of Satan," were not meant to hurt anybody, but were
based on his religious belief that divorce is against the word of God.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court found Daley incompetent to
stand trial and ordered him hospitalized for restoration to competency. The
trial court also ordered that Daley be treated with antipsychotic medication if
needed....
Upon review, we do not find that there was "some reliable, credible evidence
supporting the trial court's conclusion" that Daley was incompetent. Rather,
Dr. Noffsinger's opinion that Daley was incompetent, formulated after an hour
and ten-minute evaluation, was based solely on Daley's religious beliefs.
Specifically, Dr. Noffsinger opined that Daley, a "radical Christian,"
"expresses such extreme intensity of religious belief in very unorthodox
religious beliefs to the point to constitute psychosis." Noffsinger further
testified that treating Daley would "change his psychotic symptoms of which are
a religious theme[,]" so that his "intensity and [ ] preoccupation with his
religious beliefs will be greatly decreased."
Daley's religious beliefs are constitutionally protected, however. Because the
record demonstrates that Dr. Noffsinger's diagnosis was based solely on Daley's
religious beliefs, we find that the trial court erred in finding him
incompetent.
Those interested in the issue more generally might want to also check out the
cases cited at Is a Patient Who Believes "Jesus Would Save [Me]" Competent to
Refuse Life-Saving Medical Treatment? (July
2010)<http://volokh.com/2010/07/15/is-a-patient-who-believes-jesus-would-save-me-competent-to-refuse-life-saving-medical-treatment/>
and May Court Order Hysterectomy as Treatment for Cancer, on the Grounds that
the Woman's Refusal Is Based on a Religious Delusion? (March
2011)<http://volokh.com/2011/03/07/may-court-order-hysterectomy-as-treatment-for-cancer-on-the-grounds-that-the-womans-refusal-is-based-on-a-religious-delusion/>.
<http://volokh.com/>
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
