People v. Lockett

• Decision Date: 27 October 1983
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Samuel LOCKETT.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 802

468 N.Y.S.2d 802

121 Misc.2d 549

PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Samuel LOCKETT.

Supreme Court, Criminal Term Kings County, Part 27.

Oct. 27, 1983.

Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Kings County by Hazel Mushynsky, Asst. Dist. Atty., Brooklyn, for the People.

Michael Warren, Brooklyn, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM

MICHAEL R. JUVILER, Judge.

This is an opinion explaining an order entered September 13, 1983, granting the People's motion to vacate the defendant's plea of not responsible by reason of mental disease (CPL 220.15).

Two indictments have been filed against the defendant, accusing him of 18 counts of Robbery in the First or Third Degree. The charges are that from December 6, 1980, to January 5, 1981, on separate dates, the defendant forcibly stole property. Five of the alleged crimes had the same victim, four another victim and three a third victim.

On April 13, 1983, with the consent of the People, the court accepted the defendant's plea of not responsible on the basis of psychiatric reports that defendant suffered from a mental illness, post traumatic stress disorder, caused by his service in the United States Air Force in Vietnam. On June 7 the People moved to vacate the plea on the ground that it was obtained by fraud by the defendant; the People submitted a certified copy of defendant's Air Force file, which showed that he had never served in Vietnam.

The defendant opposed the People's motion on several grounds: The court had no authority to set aside the plea; setting it aside without the defendant's consent would subject him to double jeopardy; and the evidence presented by the People to justify vacating the plea was obtained by them without the defendant's consent, in violation of the defendant's Fourth Amendment right to privacy and Title 5 U.S.C., § 552a, the Federal Privacy Act.

The court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

THE FACTS

Except for a dispute about whether the defendant served in Vietnam and suffered from a mental disorder resulting from that service, the primary facts are undisputed.

On April 13, 1983, defendant tendered a plea of not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect, pursuant to CPL 220.15. The defendant contended that he was not criminally responsible due to his inability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his acts because of post traumatic stress disorder resulting from his experiences in Vietnam as a member of the Armed Forces. In response, the People conceded that the defense of lack of criminal responsibility could not be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt.

In considering this issue, I examined many psychiatric reports, starting with those dated October 1, 1981, prepared by Drs. Adolph Goldman and Franklin S. Klaf, pursuant to CPL 730. Both doctors had concluded that the defendant did not, as a result of mental disease or defect, lack capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense. They noted, however, the defendant's explanation that

"it started off with Vietnam ... the real reason I was sent to Vietnam, the NVA told me was to be killed."

The defendant added:

"Just came out of jail and they drafted me ... I was in the Blue Berets in the Air Force. They sent me to kill those people hoping I'd be killed myself."

One doctor pointed out that a psychiatrist had told the defendant that "Vietnam did a job on you ... [but] you'll make it." The defendant reportedly could not hold down a job and finally began using drugs again: "I had used some in Vietnam, at the time I was wounded." The report also stated that at the time of his arrest in this case, the defendant was using heroin and cocaine, up to $200 a day. He stated, "I was trying to quell my nightmares" about Vietnam. The doctor noted that defendant had recently joined the Black Israelites.

The defendant was subsequently examined by a defense-appointed psychiatrist, Dr. Murray A. Gordon. His report, dated January 2, 1982, found the defendant unfit to proceed, suffering from "post-traumatic stress disorder, severe and chronic." He described the defendant as "agitated"; he "paced back and forth, was tearful and appeared genuinely anxious and depressed." The doctor noted that Lockett was "altogether pre-occupied with experiences of that war which reportedly continue to plague him and which repeatedly distracted him to the point where he could not effectively attend to the issues ..."

The doctor further noted that the defendant reported "ongoing stress, being under fire, witnessing fellow soldiers being impaled or blown apart by land mines, having to carry parts of bodies to record a body count ..." Dr. Gordon continued:

"He reports mounting feelings of guilt, anger, and resentment at the lack of recognition for his efforts when he eventually returned home to the United States. 'There were no hurrahs, no welcome.' Instead, he recalls he was confronted with the racial baitings of Texas red-neck senior officer, was evaluated by a battery of psychiatrists, and was declared to have a 'personality problem' at Randolph AFB, Texas. His difficulties in adjustment were compounded by several months of alcohol abuse."

Dr. Gordon found that Lockett's "verbal content" reflected persistent nightmares of his Vietnam experiences. Lockett reported reliving these experiences when triggered by stimuli in his present-day environment, such as the roar of jets from LaGuardia Airport while he was housed at Riker's Island.

The doctor concluded, "This defendant is presently not competent to proceed and requires a period of in-patient psychiatric hospitalization and treatment." Dr. Gordon also questioned the defendant's responsibility for his actions; noting the unusual pattern of the crimes, he speculated that Lockett might have been seeking to be shot himself.

On this report, the Hon. Joseph Slavin found Lockett incompetent and issued an order of commitment dated January 13, 1982, for treatment at Mid-Hudson Psychiatric Center.

Three months later, Dr. Erdogan Teckben, the Director of the Mid-Hudson Psychiatric Center, found Lockett suffering from "personality disorder" but fit to proceed. In recounting the examination of the defendant, Dr. Teckben reported that when asked how he was going to plead to the charges, Lockett had answered:

"Not responsible. You know there was a war monument and the inscription read something like this. 'When you return to your country, remember to tell what happened there.' But if they say that Vietnam wasn't enough to make a man go out of his mind then they will never understand."

Doctor Teckben concluded, however, that the defendant was fully aware of his legal situation. The finding of competency was judicially confirmed on May 12, 1982.

On September 15, however, an order was signed by the Hon. Edward K. Pincus to have the defendant undergo another Article 730 examination because of the defendant's deteriorating condition and tendency toward violence.

In a psychiatric report dated September 17, 1982, Dr. Klaf now found the defendant unfit. The defendant maintained that the court is the servant of the King of Babylon, and "I fought in the jungles of Vietnam ... you don't know what it is like ... you walk through jungles and swamps where leeches suck your blood ... I am still a soldier here ..."

The psychiatric report noted that at the time Lockett was arrested, he was studying at a college, but was not doing well. The reasons given to the doctor were:

"I was bombing out ... I was having a hard time sleeping at night ... I was an accountant for the Coast Guard ... I finally resigned from that job ... I went to the VA for help and they didn't give me any help ... I never lost touch with reality ... I am still in Vietnam. When I came back from Vietnam I was trying to drink away reality ... I was drinking anything ... I became an alcoholic."

In psychiatric reports prepared by Dr. Goldman and Dr. Anthony Jimenez, dated September 22 and September 24, by contrast, Lockett was found fit to proceed. These findings were judicially confirmed. The defendant's application to plead not responsible followed.

In connection with the defendant's application, I granted a People's application to require the defendant to submit to examination by a psychiatrist chosen by the People, Dr. Stanley Brodsky. At the hearing on April 13, the People reported that Dr. Brodsky had found that Lockett suffered from a mental disease, post traumatic stress disorder, resulting from his Vietnam experience. (Minutes of plea, April 13, 1983, pp. 3-5). The People concluded that they could not disprove the defense of lack of responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt (pp. 3-4). The court agreed (pp. 11-12), and accepted the plea.

At the close of the hearing, I ordered that Lockett be examined pursuant to CPL 330.20(2), to determine whether he was currently dangerously mentally ill. A hearing pursuant to CPL 330.20(6) was scheduled for May 13. It was adjourned to June 7, because of new developments.

The Present Motions

On June 7, the People moved to vacate the plea, on the ground that it was induced by fraud. The People contended that defendant was never in Vietnam; they submitted a certified copy of his Air Force record, which showed that he had never left Randolph Air Force Base, in Texas, where he was an accounting clerk.

The People noted that before they consented to the plea of not responsible, they had subpoenaed the defendant's military record, but the National Personnel Records Center had returned the subpoena without complying, because certain federally-required procedures had not been followed.

Only after the People had consented to the defendant's plea on April 13, and in preparation for the initial commitment hearing, did the People learn that the defendant was never in Vietnam. This information was obtained pursuant to a court-ordered subpoena, dated May 10, 1983, signed by me.

The court relieved the defendant's counsel (his...