Calloway v. United States, 14877.
| Decision Date | 27 August 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 14877.,14877. |
| Parties | Jacob CALLOWAY, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Mr. William T. Hannan (appointed by this court), Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Samuel G. Foshee and Kent D. Thorup, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. John D. Lane, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, BAZELON and WASHINGTON, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was convicted of an assault with a dangerous weapon upon his estranged wife.
Before trial his court-appointed counsel moved for determination of defendant's mental competency to stand trial. As ground for this motion, counsel alleged, inter alia, that the defendant "failed to respond logically to questions put to him * * * that he seemed dazed and detached and unable to orientate himself to the fact that he was being tried by a Court of Law. * * * and that he attempted suicide on the day of the alleged offense by jumping from the Fourteenth Street Bridge into the Potomac River." At the hearing upon the motion, immediately after the court had ruled that it would order the examination, defense counsel requested that the examination include "consideration that the defendant could have been mentally ill at the time of commission of the crime." The court refused, stating: "No, I am going to order only the one thing." Counsel persisted, however, by asking if he could "make an amendment in order to include an investigation that would also tie in the defendant's mental condition at the time the crime was committed?" Whereupon the court said: "I am not going to include that in the order." Accordingly an order was entered directing an examination for the limited purpose of determining competency to stand trial.
The report of the examination conducted reads in its entirety as follows:
Appellant was thereupon brought to trial. His sole defense was insanity.
This case is governed by our recent decision in Winn v. United States, ___ U.S.App.D.C. ___, 270 F.2d 326. There the prosecutor, in a pre-trial motion, sought "a complete and thorough mental examination." But the examination ordered by the court was limited to consideration of the defendant's competency to stand trial. At trial, as in the present case,1 the limited scope of the examination conducted was apparent from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Washington v. United States
...in 122 U.S. App.D.C. 324, 331, 353 F.2d 862, 869 (1965)); Hawkins v. United States, supra note 1; Calloway v. United States, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 141, 142 & n. 1, 270 F.2d 334, 335 & n. 1. Practically all of the defendants concerned in these cases are indigents who must rely on Government docto......
-
People v. Larsen
...or otherwise inadequate reports of examinations by the examining psychiatrists. (For an example, see Calloway v. United States (1959), 106 U.S.App.D.C. 141, 142, 270 F.2d 334, 335.) This is to say nothing of impediments sometimes erected to limit access to such medical and institutional rep......
-
Leach v. United States
...competency to understand the proceedings. Winn v. United States, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 133, 270 F.2d 326 (1959); Calloway v. United States, 106 U.S.App. D.C. 141, 270 F.2d 334 (1959). 7 The need for full information at sentencing was discussed in Williams v. People of State of New York, 337 U.S.......
-
Overholser v. Lynch
...the time the act in question was committed. Winn v. United States, 1959, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 133, 270 F.2d 326; Calloway v. United States, 1959, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 141, 270 F.2d 334. It would be illogical and inconsistent in the extreme for this court now to hold that the doctrine of Winn and Ca......