E-mail Story
Print Friendly Front Page 
opinion guest_columns
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Not Enough Treatment for 'Dangerous' Defendants
By Kari Brandenburg
District Attorney, Bernalillo County
Recently, Joshua Maestas was profiled in the Journal after he was found incompetent to stand trial on domestic violence charges and then declared dangerous to himself or others.
The Journal rightly reported that the prosecutor in the case asked for the dangerous defendant to be supervised by the court until resources became available in the state's Behavioral Health Institute in Las Vegas, N.M.
Unfortunately, the judge denied our request and released Maestas to the custody of his family.
Maestas never returned home to his family after that hearing. Instead, he allegedly confronted the mother of one of his victims later that night and sparked a citywide manhunt which, thankfully, resulted in his safe apprehension.
Competency is a very complex legal issue. In summary, if a defendant is found incompetent, he or she cannot stand trial and the court must determine whether the defendant is dangerous or presents a serious threat of inflicting great bodily harm on another.
If the defendant is not found to be dangerous, the case may be dismissed. If found dangerous, the defendant can be sent to the Behavioral Health Institute for treatment in an attempt to attain competency so that the criminal case can proceed. A defendant can only be criminally committed under limited circumstances.
In Maestas' latest case, his alleged victim fled the state after Maestas was found incompetent in April and released to his family. Undeterred, the prosecutor sought a dangerousness hearing where she presented testimony from four police officers and the only victim who agreed to cooperate with law enforcement and prosecutors.
It is because of her bravery and the commitment of everyone involved that we were finally able to demonstrate to the court the full gamut of the defendant's condition. As a result, we received the "dangerousness" determination we believed was appropriate.
But this ruling came after two years of Maestas' repeated contacts with the criminal justice system; each time he was released back into our community without receiving the care he clearly needed.
In at least two of Maestas' previous cases, police reports were not submitted on time, and the cases were dismissed. In at least two others, he was found incompetent but not required to enter treatment. I share the frustration of Maestas' alleged victims.
It is understandable that victims in these cases are afraid to cooperate in the prosecution of their offenders. Though we assign each a victim advocate to walk them through every step of the process, under the law today, we cannot assure victims that their offenders will receive the mental health care they need or be held and/or supervised in some way to prevent further contact with them.
Sadly, this case is not unique in New Mexico's criminal justice system.
Court dockets are full of defendants who have been declared incompetent multiple times only to eventually be released without adequate treatment or support.
I am immediately reminded of Terry Cooke, a prolific burglar who has been arrested more than 20 times, only to be found incompetent to stand trial and released.
And, of course, we cannot have a discussion on this issue without remembering the 2005 tragedies inflicted on our community by John Hyde, who was declared incompetent and dangerous after murdering five men.
These cases highlight a problem in New Mexico's criminal justice system, which is no secret among those of us who practice in our courtrooms everyday.
Simply put, state law does not permit judges to order incompetent criminal defendants into treatment or protective custody unless they are determined to be dangerous to themselves or others. Though there are cases where professional evaluations uncover such dangerous intentions, more often dangerousness is demonstrated after a defendant has committed a violent act, not before.
When we do identify a defendant who needs immediate attention, there are not enough resources to address them. This system places prosecutors and judges in a precarious position in the courtroom, and presents an ongoing danger to police officers and victims who continue to encounter criminal defendants with untreated mental disabilities. While we are all charged with ensuring public safety, our hands are tied by the law.
The criminal justice system is arguably the state's largest mental health system, though not by design.
Our courts and our jails are ill-equipped to address even the most basic mental health needs, and continuing budget pressures in the judicial and mental health systems exacerbate a crisis that has been growing for decades. As many agencies cut back on innovative and non-core services, it is likely our most vulnerable will feel the greatest impact.
Our communities, and those persons with mental illness, deserve a system that provides care to those in need and protects our safety.
We should not have to wait for another tragedy to correct this wrong.
You also can send comments via our comment form
|
|
