Home      Login

Abstract: 

Grigsby, diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and charged with bank robbery, presents an unusual case. He was homeless and stole about $7,500 in three bank robberies. The court committed Grigsby for a competency evaluation. He was in good physical health, denied illegal drug use, never received mental health treatment or counseling, and was not taking psychotropic medication for mental illness. Grigsby refused to take oral medication to treat his schizophrenia. Because he was not gravely disabled and did not present a danger to himself, others, or the safe and secure operation of the facility, he did not meet the criteria for involuntary medication under Harper. Consequently, the evaluators requested a judicial order under Sell that would authorize them to inject Grigsby involuntarily with a first-generation antipsychotic drug, such as haloperidol (Haldol) or fluphenazine, or a second-generation antipsychotic drug, risperidone, for the purpose of restoring him to competency.

Keywords: U.S. v. Grigsby; Washington v. Harper; Riggins v. Nevada; government interest; competent to stand trial; ability to assist counsel; medical appropriateness

Affiliations:  1: Executive Editor.