Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:4-1, a person is not criminally responsible for conduct if at the time of such conduct he was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong.  Insanity is an affirmative defense which must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.  The burden is on the defendant to prove this defense.

​

“Not guilty by reason of insanity” (“NGRI”) serves to totally excuse the conduct of the actor.  It is the kind of defense which excuses conduct which is otherwise unlawful because, due to the defendant’s insanity, the conduct is not blameworthy and does not merit punishment.  See State v. Breakiron, 108 N.J. 591, 616 (1987).

​

To highlight how this rule works, it might be useful to use a couple of examples:

​

• Example – Did Not Know Nature/Quality of Actions:  Suppose a person with schizophrenia is experiencing psychosis and believes that she is drowning in water (when, in reality, she is sitting at a crowded table in a cafeteria).  Believing she needs to save herself from drowning she starts frantically flailing her arms to try to keep her head above water.  In reality, while doing this, she hit several people sitting at the cafeteria table.  The defendant, as a result is charged with aggravated assault.  When asserting the insanity defense, counsel would argue that due to her mental illness, she did not know the nature or quality of her actions due to her mental illness and, therefore, is not responsible for the aggravated assaults.  In other words, she did not realize she was hitting people because in her mind she was trying to save herself from drowning in water—she didn’t even realize she was sitting with people, much less causing them harm.

 

• Example – Knew Actions But Did Not Know Actions Were Wrong:  Suppose a person has schizophrenia and fails to pull over when the police are trying to conduct a motor vehicle stop because, due to psychosis or paranoid delusions, she believes that the car behind her is a hitman trying to kill her, so she keeps driving.  She knows the nature and quality of her actions (i.e. that she is driving a car and that she is not stopping the car), but she did not, because of her mental illness, realize what she was doing was wrong.  Instead, she believed she was trying to protect herself.  In this case, the individual would not be legally responsible for eluding a police officer.

​

The first step to asserting this defense is to provide notice to the Court and the prosecutor of an intention to raise the defense.  The next step is to have the client evaluated by a qualified mental health professional, who will review the client’s past psychiatric records and conduct an detailed evaluation with the client.  The expert will then write a report detailing her findings and conclusions “to a reasonable degree of medical or psychological certainty.”  Next, the Court will hold a hearing at which time the expert will testify, and the State will have an opportunity to cross-examine the expert.  The State also has the right to have the client evaluated by its own expert.  The Court will then make a finding as to whether the defendant has met its burden in establishing the client is not guilty by reason of insanity.

​

Civil Commitment of Person Found Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity:  Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:4-8, once a person is found not guilty by reason of insanity, the court must order the defendant undergo a psychiatric examination by a psychiatrist to determine whether or not the defendant poses a danger to himself or the community.  If the court finds the defendant is not a danger, then he will be released to the community (with conditions that he must undergo outpatient treatment).  If the court finds the defendant is a danger to himself or others then the defendant will be civilly committed until such time that he is no longer a danger to himself or others. 

​

To be clear:  not guilty by reason of insanity does not mean that the person is “insane.”  Rather, it means that at the time of the alleged offense(s) a mental disease or defect altered the person’s reality in such a way that he or she is not criminally responsible for his or her actions.  A person can be NGRI but totally lucid and competent currently.  In its simplest form, NGRI is an “at the time of the offense” defense, not a “whether you are currently competent to proceed with the criminal case” defense.

​

Contact a New Jersey Competency

Lawyer for a Free Consultation

​

Ms. Denholtz has handled several NGRI trials to conclusion, where her clients were found NGRI and the criminal charges against them were dismissed.  NGRI is a very complicated process and you need a skilled attorney to help you navigate that process.  Ms. Denholtz will provide an honest and detailed evaluation of your case, outline the best legal options available, and craft a defense strategy designed to achieve the best possible result for your unique situation.  Contact Denholtz Criminal Defense today for your free consultation: (862) 842-0811 or Tracy@DenholtzCriminalDefense.com.