Miss. R. Crim. P. 12.3

As amended through March 21, 2024

Rule 12.3 - Appointment of Experts

(a)Grounds for Appointment. If the court determines that reasonable grounds for a mental examination exist, it shall appoint a competent psychiatrist and/or psychologist to examine the defendant and, if necessary, to testify regarding the defendant's mental condition. The court has discretion to appoint more than one (1) examiner.

(b)Examination; Commitment. The court may order that a defendant be examined in an appropriate mental health facility, and it may commit a defendant to the Mississippi State Hospital or other appropriate mental health facility for no longer than reasonably necessary to conduct the examination if:

(1) the defendant cannot be examined on an outpatient basis;

(2) examination in an outpatient setting is unavailable; or

(3) commitment for examination is indispensable to a clinically valid diagnosis and report.

The examination and inpatient consultation shall be in the least restrictive appropriate setting.

(c)Reports.

(1)Opinion on Competency. A psychiatrist and/or psychologist appointed by the court pursuant to this Rule shall submit a report containing an opinion as to whether the defendant is competent, and the basis therefor. The report may also include additional findings and opinions concerning whether the defendant's mental condition creates a present danger to the defendant and/or others.

(2)Cause and Treatment of Incompetency. If the opinion referenced in (c)(1) is that the defendant is incompetent under the standards in Rule 12.1, the report shall also state the psychiatrist's and/or psychologist's opinion of:

(A) the condition causing the defendant's incompetency and the nature thereof;

(B) the treatment, if any, required for the defendant to attain competency;

(C) the most appropriate form and place of treatment, in view of the defendant's therapeutic needs and potential danger to the defendant and/or others, and an explanation of appropriate treatment alternatives;

(D) the likelihood of the defendant's attaining competency under treatment and the probable duration of the treatment; and

(E) the availability of the various types of acceptable treatment in the local geographic area, specifying the agencies or the settings in which the treatment might be obtained and whether the treatment would be available on an outpatient basis.

(3)Opinion on Mental Condition at Time of the Offense. In addition, if the court so orders, the report shall contain a statement of the psychiatrist's and/or psychologist's opinion of the following:

(A) the mental condition of the defendant at the time of the alleged offense;

(B) if the psychiatrist's and/or psychologist's opinion is that at the time of the alleged offense the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect, the relation, if any, of such to the alleged offense, including:

(i) whether the defendant knew the nature and quality of the defendant's actions; and

(ii) if so, whether the defendant knew that the actions were wrong.

and

(C) such other matters as the court may deem appropriate.

(4)Opinion on Intellectual Disability in Death Penalty Cases. In addition, if the court so orders in a death penalty case, the report shall contain a statement of the psychiatrist's and/or psychologist's opinion as to whether the defendant is intellectually disabled and, if so, to what extent.

(d)Additional Expert Assistance. For good cause shown, the court may appoint additional experts and order the defendant to submit to physical, neurological, psychiatric, or psychological examinations, if necessary for an adequate determination of the defendant's mental condition.

(e)Costs. Any cost or expense in connection with the court-ordered mental examination(s) shall be paid by the county in which such criminal action originated.

Miss. R. Crim. P. 12.3

Adopted eff. 7/1/2017.

Comment

Consistent with former Rule 9.06 of the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court and Mississippi Code Section 99-13-11, Rule 12.3(a) provides that where "reasonable grounds" exist, the court must appoint a competent psychiatrist and/or psychologist to examine the defendant and testify regarding the defendant's mental condition.

Section (b) ensures that a defendant will not be subjected to confinement in a mental health facility, unless a less restrictive alternative (such as local outpatient services) is unavailable, and it ensures that any confinement will be for only the minimum time required to conduct necessary examinations. See Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715, 92 S. Ct. 1845, 32 L. Ed. 2d 435 (1972) (indefinite commitment based solely on incompetence to stand trial is unconstitutional). Once a court-ordered examination is completed, the examiner's report shall be filed with the court clerk, as provided in Rule 12.4.

Because the Rule 12.3 examination may also provide information concerning a possible insanity defense, the psychologist and/or psychiatrist may be required, pursuant to Rule 12.3(c)(3), to report on the mental condition of the defendant at the time of the alleged offense and on the relationship, if any, of the defendant's mental disease or defect to the alleged criminal act. Rule 12.3(c)(3) is not intended to establish a new legal test for insanity, or to change the test that was in use before adoption of these Rules. See Nolan v. State, 61 So. 3d 887, 895-97 (Miss. 2011) (citations omitted) ("Mississippi follows the M'Naghten standard for determining whether a defendant was sane at the time of the crime[,]" and has repeatedly declined to abandon that standard). Rule 12.3 merely requires the psychiatrist and/or psychologist to describe the defendant's mental condition in broad medical language. See Roundtree v. State, 568 So. 2d 1173 (Miss. 1990). Whether a person is mentally ill, and to what extent, is a medical judgment that a psychologist and/or psychiatrist should make; whether the defendant is sufficiently ill to be exonerated of criminal responsibility, i.e., whether the defendant is legally insane, is a legal judgment for the jury or trier of fact to make after proper instructions. Section (c)(4) extends these procedures to the question of the defendant's possible intellectual disability in death penalty cases. See Chase v. State, 873 So. 2d 1013, 1027 (Miss. 2004) (citing Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 122 S. Ct. 2242, 153 L. Ed. 2d 335 (2002)).

Section (e) expressly provides for payment of the expenses of such professionals, within limits provided by law. See Miss. Code Ann. § 99-13-11. Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S. Ct. 1087, 84 L. Ed. 2d 53 (1985), which holds that an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to a psychiatrist provided at state expense, is applicable when the defendant demonstrates to the trial judge that the defendant's sanity (or insanity) at the time of the offense is to be a significant factor at trial or that the defendant's mental state is likely to be a significant factor. Where a defense-consultant psychologist and/or psychiatrist is constitutionally required, such an expert may be appointed under Rule 12.3(a).