I have a jury trial to determine competency starting next week. The court has already appointed a doctor who found the defendant competent to stand trial, but defense attorney wants a trial anyway, so here we are.

Having never done one before, was curious if anyone has a voir dire they might share?

Any other suggestions?

I just e-mailed you a copy of the voir dire notes I used this last year.

You should get a copy of Mental Defenses by Williamson County ADA Jane Starnes. She has a voir dire in there.

[This message was edited by JohnR on 03-16-10 at .]

What's the defense attorney going to do? Testify himself? Weird situation.

The last time I did a contested competency trial, the defense put the defendant on the witness stand. She was nutty, just not incompetent.

It actually turned out to be a good thing for the State. I got to cross-examine the defendant, which was great preparation for when she testified during trial.

I learned how to question someone with a mental illness. Certain questions triggered crazy answers (e.g., any question about conspiracies). On the other hand, there were many subject on which the defendant appeared quite appropriate and intelligent (e.g., daily tasks like driving a car, cooking or going to work in a library).

Good luck, and keep us posted on the progress.

I actually did have a copy of Mental Defenses and it was very helpful! Thanks for that suggestion.

The defense attorney didnt testify himself but he did put his investigator on the stand. Oddly enough, the investigator testified that the defendant had provided him with three possible defenses to the offense. However, according to them, none of those defenses panned out and since he couldnt provide them with a VALID defense to the crime, he must be incompetent. I suppose it couldnt be that he was guilty and just didnt have a defense. It definitely didnt show that he was incompetent, however. In fact, I thought it helped my case.

The only witness I put on the stand was the doctor who did the evaulation for the court. We got a verdict finding him competent in less than 15 minutes.

If you're truly not guilty, then wouldn't you just have ONE defense? If you have to have 3 alternative defenses, then that means you're guilty. Not incompetent. Congratulations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jane starnes:
If you're truly not guilty, then wouldn't you just have ONE defense? If you have to have 3 alternative defenses, then that means you're guilty. Not incompetent. Congratulations.

---

Excellent comment!