V.7. Pretrial Motions: NGI

Go Back to Rules Index

When in any criminal case a defendant is adjudged to be indigent or partially indigent, and is not represented by the public defender or regional counsel, and counsel has reason to believe that the defendant may be incompetent to proceed or that the defendant may have been insane at the time of the offense or probation or community control violation, counsel may so inform the court who shall appoint 1 expert to examine the defendant in order to assist counsel in the preparation of the defense. The expert shall report only to the attorney for the defendant and matters related to the expert shall be deemed to fall under the lawyer-client privilege.

When in any criminal case it shall be the intention of the defendant to rely on the defense of insanity either at trial or probation or community control violation hearing, no evidence offered by the defendant for the purpose of establishing that defense shall be admitted in the case unless advance notice in writing of the defense shall have been given by the defendant as hereinafter provided.

The defendant shall give notice of intent to rely on the defense of insanity no later than 15 days after the arraignment or the filing of a written plea of not guilty in the case when the defense of insanity is to be relied on at trial or no later than 15 days after being brought before the appropriate court to answer to the allegations in a violation of probation or community control proceeding. If counsel for the defendant shall have reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant may be incompetent to proceed, the notice shall be given at the same time that the motion for examination into the defendant’s competence is filed. The notice shall contain a statement of particulars showing the nature of the insanity the defendant expects to prove and the names and addresses of the witnesses by whom

On the filing of such notice and on motion of the state, the court shall order the defendant to be examined by the state’s mental health expert(s) as to the sanity or insanity of the defendant at the time of the commission of the alleged offense or probation or community control violation. Attorneys for the state and defendant may be present at the examination

The defendant shall give notice of intent to rely on any mental health defense other than insanity as soon as a good faith determination has been made to utilize the defense but in no event later than 30 days prior to trial. The notice shall contain a statement of particulars showing the nature of the defense the defendant expects to prove and the names and addresses of the witnesses by whom the defendant expects to prove the defense, insofar as possible. If expert testimony will be presented, the notice shall indicate whether the expert has examined the defendant.

If the notice to rely on any mental health defense other than insanity indicates the defendant will rely on the testimony of an expert who has examined the defendant, the court shall upon motion of the state order the defendant be examined by one qualified expert for the state as to the mental health defense raised by the defendant. Upon a showing of good cause, the court may order additional examinations upon motion by the state or the defendant. Attorneys for the state and defendant may be present at the examination. When the defendant relies on the testimony of an expert who has not examined the defendant, the state shall not be entitled to a compulsory examination of the defendant.

On good cause shown for the omission of the notice of intent to rely on the defense of insanity, or any mental health defense, the court may in its discretion grant the defendant 10 days to comply with the notice requirement. If leave is granted and the defendant files the notice, the defendant is deemed unavailable to proceed. If the trial has already commenced, the court, only on motion of the defendant, may declare a mistrial in order to permit the defendant to raise the defense of insanity pursuant to this rule. Any motion for mistrial shall constitute a waiver of the defendant’s right to any claim of former jeopardy arising from the uncompleted trial.

If the defendant has been released on bail or other release conditions, the court may order the defendant to appear at a designated place for evaluation at a specific time as a condition of the release provision. If the court determines that the defendant will not submit to the evaluation provided for herein or that the defendant is not likely to appear for the scheduled evaluation, the court may order the defendant taken into custody until the evaluation is completed. A motion made for evaluation under this subdivision shall not otherwise affect the defendant’s right to pretrial release.

Any experts appointed by the court may be summoned to testify at the trial, and shall be deemed court witnesses whether called by the court or by either party. Other evidence regarding the defendant’s insanity or mental condition may be introduced by either party. At trial, in its instructions to the jury, the court shall include an instruction on the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.

1980 Adoption. (a) This subdivision is based on Pouncy v. State, 353 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), and provides that an expert may be provided for an indigent defendant. The appointment of the expert will in this way allow the public defender or court-appointed attorney to screen possible incompetency or insanity cases and give a basis for determining whether issues of incompetency or insanity ought to be raised before the court; it will also permit the defense attorney to specify in greater detail in the statement of particulars the nature of the insanity that attorney expects to prove, if any, and the basis for the raising of that defense. (b) Essentially the same as in prior rules; provides that written notice must be given in advance by the defendant. (c) Since counsel for indigents often are not appointed until arraignment and since it is sometimes difficult for a defendant to make a determination on whether the defense of insanity should be raised prior to arraignment, a 15-day post-arraignment period is provided for the filing of the notice. The defendant must raise incompetency at the same time as insanity, if at all possible. With the appointment of the expert to assist, the defendant should be able to raise both issues at the same time if grounds for both exist. The remainder of the rule, providing for the statement to be included in the notice, is essentially the same as that in prior rules. (d) The appointment of experts provision is designed to track, insofar as possible, the provisions for appointment of experts contained in the rules relating to incompetency to stand trial and in the Florida Statutes relating to appointment of expert witnesses. Insofar as possible, the single examination should include incompetency, involuntary commitment issues where there are reasonable grounds for their consideration, and issues of insanity at time of the offense. Judicial economy would mandate such a single examination where possible. (g) In order to obtain more standardized reports, specific items relating to the examination are required of the examining experts. See note to rule 3.211(a). (h) Essentially the substance of prior rule 3.210(e)(4) and (5), with some changes. Both prior provisions are combined into a single provision; speedy trial time limits are no longer set forth, but waiver of double jeopardy is mandated. (i) Same as rule 3.210(b)(3), relating to incompetency to stand trial. See commentary to that rule. (j) A restatement of former rule 3.210(e)(7). The provision that experts called by the court shall be deemed court witnesses is new. The former provision relating to free access to the defendant is eliminated as unnecessary. As to appointment of experts, see section 912.11, Florida Statutes.

1988 Amendment. The amendments to this rule, including the title, provide for the affirmative defense of insanity in violation of probation or community control proceedings as well as at trial.

1992 Amendment. The purpose of the amendment is to gender neutralize the wording of the rule.

1996 Amendment. Subdivisions (e) and (f) were added to conform to State v. Hickson, 630 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1993). These amendments are not intended to expand existing case law.

When a person is found by the jury or the court not guilty of the offense or is found not to be in violation of probation or community control by reason of insanity, the jury or judge, in giving the verdict or finding of not guilty judgment, shall state that it was given for that reason.

When a person is found not guilty of the offense or is found not to be in violation of probation or community control by reason of insanity, if the court then determines that the defendant presently meets the criteria set forth by law, the court shall commit the defendant to the Department of Children and Families or shall order outpatient treatment at any other appropriate facility or service, or shall discharge the defendant. Any order committing the defendant or requiring outpatient treatment or other outpatient service shall contain:

(1) findings of fact relating to the issue of commitment or other court-ordered treatment;

(2) copies of any reports of experts filed with the court; and

(3) any other psychiatric, psychological, or social work report submitted to the court relative to the mental state of the defendant.

1980 Adoption. (a) Same substance as in prior rule. (b) The criteria for commitment are set forth in chapter 394, Florida Statutes. This rule incorporates those statutory criteria by reference and then restates the other alternatives available to the judge under former rule 3.210.

See section 912.18, Florida Statutes, for criteria. (1) This subdivision is equivalent to rule 3.212(b)(2); see commentary to that rule.

1988 Amendment. The amendments to this rule provide for evaluation of a defendant found not guilty by reason of insanity in violation of probation or community control proceedings as well as at trial. The amendments further reflect 1985 amendments to chapter 916, Florida Statutes. 1992 Amendment. The purpose of the amendment is to gender neutralize the wording of the rule.

The Department of Children and Families shall admit to an appropriate facility a defendant found not guilty by reason of insanity under rule 3.217 and found to meet the criteria for commitment for hospitalization and treatment and may retain and treat the defendant. No later than 6 months from the date of admission, the administrator of the facility shall file with the court a report, and provide copies to all parties, which shall address the issues of further commitment of the defendant. If at any time during the 6-month period, or during any period of extended hospitalization that may be ordered under this rule, the administrator of the facility shall determine that the defendant no longer meets the criteria for commitment, the administrator shall notify the court by such a report and provide copies to all parties. The procedure for determinations of the confidential status of reports is governed by Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.420.

The court shall hold a hearing within 30 days of the receipt of any report from the administrator of the facility on the issues raised thereby, and the defendant shall have a right to be present at the hearing. If the court determines that the defendant continues to meet the criteria for continued commitment or treatment, the court shall order further commitment or treatment for a period not to exceed 1 year. The same procedure shall be repeated before the expiration of each additional 1-year period in which the defendant is retained by the facility.

Before any hearing held under this rule, the court may, on its own motion, and shall, on motion of counsel for the state or defendant, appoint no fewer than 2 nor more than 3 experts to examine the defendant relative to the criteria for continued commitment or placement of the defendant and shall specify the date by which the experts shall report to the court on these issues and provide copies to all parties.

1980 Adoption. This provision provides for hospitalization of a defendant found not guilty by reason of insanity and is meant to track similar provisions in the rules relating to competency to stand trial and the complementary statutes. It provides for an initial 6- month period of commitment with successive 1-year periods; it provides for reports to the court and for the appointment of experts to examine the defendant when such hearings are necessary. The underlying rationale of this rule is to make standard, insofar as possible, the commitment process, whether it be for incompetency to stand trial or following a judgment of not guilty by reason of insanity. For complementary statute providing for hospitalization of defendant adjudicated not guilty by reason of insanity, see section 912.15, Florida Statutes.

1988 Amendment. The amendments to this rule, including the title, provide for commitment of defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity in violation of probation or community control proceedings, as well as those so found at trial. The amendments further reflect 1985 amendments to chapter 916, Florida Statutes.

The committing court may order a conditional release of any defendant who has been committed according to a finding of incompetency to proceed or an adjudication of not guilty by reason of insanity based on an approved plan for providing appropriate outpatient care and treatment. When the administrator shall determine outpatient treatment of the defendant to be appropriate, the administrator may file with the court, and provide copies to all parties, a written plan for outpatient treatment, including recommendations from qualified professionals. The plan may be submitted by the defendant. The plan shall include:

(1) special provisions for residential care, adequate supervision of the defendant, or both;

(2) provisions for outpatient mental health services; and

(3) if appropriate, recommendations for auxiliary services such as vocational training, educational services, or special medical care.

In its order of conditional release, the court shall specify the conditions of release based on the release plan and shall direct the appropriate agencies or persons to submit periodic reports to the court regarding the defendant’s compliance with the conditions of the release, and progress in treatment, and provide copies to all parties. The procedure for determinations of the confidential status of reports is governed by Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.420.

If it appears at any time that the defendant has failed to comply with the conditions of release, or that the defendant’s condition has deteriorated to the point that inpatient care is required, or that the release conditions should be modified, the court, after hearing, may modify the release conditions or, if the court finds the defendant meets the statutory criteria for commitment, may order that the defendant be recommitted to the Department of Children and Families for further treatment.

If at any time it is determined after hearing that the defendant no longer requires court-supervised follow-up care, the court shall terminate its jurisdiction in the cause and discharge the defendant.

1980 Adoption. This rule implements the prior statutory law permitting conditional release. For complementary statute providing for conditional release, see section 916.17, Florida Statutes.

1988 Amendment. The amendments to this rule are designed to reflect amendments to rules 3.210, 3.211, and 3.218 as well as 1985 amendments to chapter 916, Florida Statutes. (b) This provision has been amended to permit the court to recommit a conditionally released defendant to HRS under the provisions of chapter 916 only if the court makes a finding that the defendant currently meets the statutory commitment criteria found in section 916.13(1), Florida Statutes.

1992 Amendment. The purpose of the amendment is to gender neutralize the wording of the rule.