A case at law.

Abstract

He was later arraigned in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on charges of housebreaking with intent to commit an assault, assault with intent to steal, assault with intent to rape, and assault with a dangerous weapon.As attorney for Mr. Jenkins, the court appointed Gerald Golin who, after the defendant had pleaded not guilty to the indictment, filed on July 7, 19S9, a motion for mental examination of his client. July 9, 1959, found the latter committed to D. C. General Hospital for examination to determine his competence to stand trial. On motion of the Government, the trial court enlarged the commitment order on September 4, 1959, to have the examination include a determination of the defendant's mental condition on June 10, 1959, date of the alleged crime.On November 27, 1959, a letter of November 25, 1959, from the Chief Psychiatrist of D. C. General Hospital was filed in the trial court stating that (a) defendant was incompetent to stand trial, and (b) he had been mentally incompetent on June 10, 1959, The Government entered no objections and, accordingly, on December 15, 1959, an order was filed committing Jenkins to St. Elizabeth's Hospital. Some 10 months later, a letter of October 13, 1960, from the Superintendent of St. Elizabeth's Hospital was filed in the trial court to the effect that the defendant was now competent to stand trial. The attorney for the defense objected to the report, and a hearing was held at which only one witness (a psychiatrist) testified. In his opinion the defendant was competent to stand trial; he admitted, however, that the defendant had not recovered and was in essentially the same condition as on admission. Despite the objections entered by the attorney for the defense, the trial court ruled that his client was now competent to stand trial.

Seventeen years later: Clinical psychology in light of the 1947 Committee on Training in Clinical Psychology Report.

“…(Oct. 31, 1963). 11 We might also note in passing the development of more accepting attitudes toward psychologists that is reflected in the Jenkins decision in relation to expert testimony (Hoch & Darley, 1962), and the agreements that the APA has been able to get from prepaid medical plans for payment for psychotherapy by psychologists. Clinical psychologists must become worthy of such developments.…”

The Current Status of the Psychologist as an Expert Witness.

“…Of additional interest are reviews of Jenkins v. United States by Hoch and Darley (1962), and by Lassen (1964). In summary, the psychologist is generally recognized today as an expert who can draw inferences about facts that are outside of the experience of the ordinary juror.…”