No. CS/SB 1326
Filed under Criminal Justice.
Prosecution of Defendants; Revising the qualifications for an insanity defense; updating reporting requirements for examining experts; revising requirements for dismissal of charges; requiring involuntary commitment for persons found not guilty by reason of insanity in certain circumstances; revising mitigating circumstances for sentencing, etc.
Plain English Summary
AI-GENERATEDThe insanity defense now requires only that the defendant did not know what they were doing or its consequences. The prior alternative, not knowing the act was wrong, is deleted.
Experts must now report whether a defendant is malingering and the specific instrument or method used to reach that finding.
Courts must now involuntarily commit defendants acquitted by reason of insanity who are manifestly dangerous, rather than having discretion to do so.
Dismissal of charges for incompetent defendants is now tied to the maximum statutory sentence rather than a fixed five-year period.
AINarrows the insanity defense by removing the 'did not know it was wrong' prong, requiring only that the defendant did not know what they were doing or its consequences.
AIChanges the court's discretion to mandate involuntary commitment for defendants acquitted by reason of insanity who are manifestly dangerous.
AIRestricts dismissal of charges for defendants adjudicated incompetent to proceed, requiring a waiting period equal to the maximum statutory sentence if it exceeds five years.
AIReplaces the general 'amenable to treatment' mitigating factor with a specific requirement for specialized treatment of severe physical disability or severe and persistent mental illness, prohibiting outpatient therapy in lieu of incarceration for certain offenses.