PSYCHOLOGY - - 100% NO PLAGIARISM PLEASE

Use one of the two forensic reports- Competency Report OR Sanity Report . If you use either of these evaluations, you will need to write your own diagnosis and opinion using the information contained in these documents.

· Competency Report.

· Sanity Report.

Clearly label and complete the following three parts of this assignment:

Assignment Parts

Part 1 – Diagnosis and Opinion

· Write your diagnosis and opinion for one of the evaluations provided. Make sure to indicate which evaluation you chose.

·

Part 2: Verifying Veracity

Defendants frequently provide some inconsistent or inaccurate information about their history. Explain your approach for obtaining the most accurate information regarding your evaluee. Consider the following methods:

· Third-party data: Identify at least two potential sources of third-party data for your evaluee. Discuss why these sources are useful to determining the veracity of the evaluee's statements.

· Psychological testing: Identify at least two commonly used psychological tests to determine the veracity of the evaluee's reported symptoms. Explain why these tests would be useful and appropriate in your particular evaluee's case.

· Interviewing skills: Discuss your approach to interviewing the evaluee to determine the veracity of their statements. What techniques might you use and why?

Part 3: Substance Abuse

Substance abuse is a very common issue for forensic evaluees. Explain how substance use on the part of your evaluee impacts your diagnosis and, potentially, your forensic opinion. Support your opinions with research.

Additional Requirements

· Resources: Reference a minimum of two professional or academic resources using current APA guidelines.

· Formatting: Create headers for each part of the assignment.

· Length: 5–6 double spaced pages.

· Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 points.

COMPETENCY REPORT

Mr. Smith’ relative weakness in working memory, the FSIQ score of 79 is considered the most

accurate and reliable estimate of his overall cognitive ability.

MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION: Mr. Smith is a 24-year-old Caucasian male who is six feet,

two inches tall and weighs approximately 180 pounds. He has short blonde hair, brown eyes,

and a moustache and goatee. He was dressed in standard black and white jail attire and he had

fair hygiene, although he had mild body odor. Mr. Smith made appropriate eye contact. His

speech was of normal rate and volume, and he provided information in a clear and coherent

manner. Mr. Smith’s thought process was organized, logical, and goal-oriented. He did not

demonstrate any unusual physical movements.

Mr. Smith was generally cooperative with this evaluation and provided personal information with

ease. However, he appeared to minimize his history of substance use. He had a pleasant and

friendly demeanor, occasionally laughing and making jokes when appropriate. Mr. Smith had a

euthymic mood and his affect was congruent with his mood.

Mr. Smith denied experiencing delusional beliefs or auditory or visual hallucinations, and there

was no indication by his behavior or speech that he was experiencing any perceptual

disturbances during this evaluation. He did not present with any observable symptoms of mania,

including an abnormally elevated or irritable mood, grandiosity, increased talkativeness, or

racing thoughts. In addition, Mr. Smith denied current suicidal and homicidal ideation.

During this evaluation, Mr. Smith was oriented to person, place, date, and situation. His recent

and remote memory were intact as demonstrated by his ability to recall past and recent

personal information. His attention and concentration were adequate, his insight was fair, and

he appeared to be functioning in the low-average to borderline range of intelligence.

COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT: Mr. Smith identified his current charges as “assault on an

officer” and “obstruction,” which he reported were both felonies. He indicated that if convicted of

the alleged offenses, he could receive a maximum of 18 months in “the joint.” However, he

hoped that “they’ll drop one [of the charges] at least” because “I don’t need no more felonies”

and “they stick to you,” making it difficult to find a job. Mr. Smith was able to provide a coherent

account of his behavior at the time of the alleged instant offenses, and he was aware of the

allegations against him.

Mr. Smith was capable of identifying appropriate courtroom personnel and their respective roles.

He stated that a judge does “all the work…they handle the cases. They see what’s right from

wrong. They judge upon your status.” He indicated that if he is found guilty of the alleged

offenses, the judge finds “a punishment for you,” and if he is not found guilty, “I’ll be released.”

Mr. Smith stated that a defense attorney’s role is to “help you. They get information to help you,

back you up, make the situation better,” and “speak for you. He added that the defense attorney

tries “to help you” with “the case.” Mr. Smith indicated that a prosecutor’s role is to “go through

all your information in the system and let the judge know” and make recommendations to the

judge about the defendant. When asked if the prosecutor was on his side, he responded, “No.”

He was aware that he should not discuss his current legal issues with the prosecutor in the

absence of his attorney, because the information may be used against him. Mr. Smith indicated

that a jury must “all come to one agreement” on “whether you guilty or not.” He stated that they

come to that decision by hearing testimony and deliberating together. Mr. Smith indicated that a

witness’ role is to “talk about the situation,” including “what she seen” at the time of the alleged

offense. Mr. Smith also recognized that witnesses may be called for either the prosecution or

defense side. He stated that if a witness were to provide inaccurate testimony, he would “just tell

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title

7

him [his attorney], but he has to explain how it’s not true.” Mr. Smith was aware that if he blurted

out information, “the judge [would] probably tell you to be seated…sit down” and “hand you over

to the authority” for “order in the court.” He indicated that a sheriff’s deputy is present in the

courtroom “to get the information, like the paperwork” and “guard” whoever is “out of order.” He

stated that a stenographer’s role is typing “everything that’s said” in court.

Mr. Smith identified his potential plea options as “guilty, not guilty, no contest, insanity.” He

defined a plea of guilty as “You did it”; a plea of not guilty as “You didn’t do it”; and a plea of no

contest as “You either-or. You’re in between. You might be not guilty or guilty” and “the judge”

decides the outcome. He defined a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity as “I got problems. It

happened in a way I’m not able to be guilty from. Probably I wasn’t in my mind.… I wasn’t able

to be in control” at the time of the offense. Mr. Smith also was aware that a possible outcome of

being found not guilty by reason of insanity is commitment to a state psychiatric hospital, and he

understood the maximum potential time of hospitalization when it was explained to him.

Mr. Smith indicated that a plea bargain is “agreement between the two parties” in which the

defendant gets “something they like,” which “depends on the deal.” However, he stated that it

usually includes “being set free, a piece of freedom.” He acknowledged that the defendant has

to “submit to the case” and plead “guilty” in order to take a plea bargain. Mr. Smith was also

aware that a defendant loses “the right to fight” the case by entering a plea of guilty.

Mr. Smith identified his attorney as “John Doe,” and he reported meeting with him on two

occasions, once in jail and once at court. He indicated that “he’s all right,” but he is “not paid, so

I really can’t trust him” because “you ain’t paying his bills.” Nevertheless, he identified being able

to work with him toward achieving a positive outcome for his case. Mr. Smith stated that if were

to disagree with his attorney, he would “tell him” because “I should have the choice” in decisionmaking in his own case. Mr. Smith also recognized that he should not provide inaccurate

information to his attorney or withhold information from him because this may result in his

attorney being unable to adequately prepare a defense strategy.

Regarding appropriate courtroom behavior, Mr. Smith indicated that she should “just keep my

head down,” “listen and follow orders,” “stand up for myself,” “try to stay out of the way,” and

“stay calm and collected.” He stated that he should not “look at the judge, talk the wrong way,

dog the judge, f- you judge.”

DIAGNOSIS:

OPINION:

Respectfully Submitted,

Fred Flintstone, Ph.D.

Psychologist

SANITY REPORT

March 3, 2016

Honorable Paul Jones, Judge

County Court

111 Street

Anytown, OH 12345

RE: John Smith

CASE NUMBER: CR-2016-12-345678

Sanity Evaluation

Dear Judge Jones:

John Smith is a 31-year-old African American male referred by the court for an evaluation of

Mental Condition at the Time of the Offense Charged, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code (O.R.C.)

Section 2945.371(G)(4). He is currently charged with felonious assault, a felony of the 2nd

degree, for an incident that allegedly occurred on or about January 1, 2016.

Dr. Wilma Flintstone interviewed Mr. Smith at the County Jail on March 1, 2016, for

approximately 78 minutes. Mr. Smith participated in psychological testing with Betty Rubble,

M.A., psychology assistant, on March 2, 2016, at the County Jail for approximately 150 minutes.

He was administered the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST), the reading

subtest of the Wide Range Achievement Test, fourth edition (WRAT-4), and the Minnesota

Multiphasic Personality Inventory, second edition restructured form (MMPI-2-RF) on that date.

Prior to the commencement of this evaluation and psychological testing, Mr. Smith was advised

of the nature and purpose of the evaluation. Mr. Smith was informed that the resulting report

was not confidential and that information obtained could be included in the report that would be

submitted to the court. He was aware this information was not related to treatment but rather for

his current criminal case. Mr. Smith was provided this information both orally and in a written

format. He stated that he understood the information provided to him, including the limits of

confidentiality and his rights concerning the evaluation.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION:

1. County Court, journal entry ordering the present evaluation.

2. County Court, indictment.

3. Police Department: Incident Report, Report of Investigation, and Supplemental Arrest

Report.

4. Collateral contact with Donald Duck, Mr. Smith’s defense attorney.

5. County Jail, behavioral health records.

6. Your Behavioral Healthcare, psychiatric records.

7. Bedrock Behavioral Health, psychiatric records.

SOCIAL HISTORY: John Smith was born on January 1, 1985. His parents divorced when he

was in elementary school. He was subsequently raised by his mother and stepfather. His

stepfather is a truck driver. Mr. Smith described his relationship with his parents as “okay,” but

they have not spoken since his arrest in the instant matter. He has two brothers and one sister.

He also has a paternal half-brother that he has never met. In addition, his mother and stepfather

have two children together.

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title

2

With regard to childhood abuse, Mr. Smith described his stepfather as abusive. He said his

childhood “sucked,” but he did not elaborate upon that statement. He moved out of the family

home at age 18. He was homeless at the time of his arrest in the current case.

EDUCATION HISTORY: Mr. Smith attended public school and last completed the 9th grade.

The defendant earned B and C grades. Mr. Smith was suspended on approximately five

occasions due to physical altercations with his peers. He earned a GED in 2004 while

incarcerated.

EMPLOYMENT AND MILITARY HISTORY: Mr. Smith denied any military history. During

adolescence, he began working at several pet stores and veterinarian offices. He estimated

working “50” positions during his lifetime, with the longest being three years at a restaurant.

Otherwise, his positions have been brief due to being homeless, without transportation, and “not

getting along with employees.” In 2015, he applied for Social Security and was denied.

RELATIONSHIP HISTORY: Mr. Smith has not been married and has no children. His most

recent relationship was “20 years” ago, lasted six to seven months, and ended because he went

to prison. He is not currently dating.

SUBSTANCE USE HISTORY: Mr. Smith drank alcohol for the first time at age 19. He estimated

he drank a “beer or something” once a month throughout most of his adult life. He denied any

use of alcohol on the date of the offense charged. Mr. Smith reported that he experienced

cravings for alcohol, gave up important activities to drink, frequently drove a vehicle under the

influence of alcohol, and continued to drink alcohol despite the occupational, financial, and

relationship problems it caused him.

Mr. Smith reported his first use of marijuana at age 12, during which time he smoked a “quarter

ounce a day,” three to seven times a week. He stated that the frequency and amount of

marijuana use has remained unchanged throughout his life. He stated that he had not smoked

any marijuana for seven or more days before his arrest in the instant matter. Mr. Smith initially

denied any use of K-2 (synthetic marijuana), but later said he tried it once but “no more than

that.” However, he then revised that statement to reflect that he smoked K-2 a “couple times a

year,” but not in the last three to four years. Mr. Smith reported that he developed tolerance for

marijuana, experienced withdrawal symptoms when he could not use it, craved marijuana, spent

a great deal of time involved in activities related to his use of that substance, had difficulty

controlling his use of it, gave up important activities to use marijuana, frequently drove a vehicle

under the influence of it, and continued to smoke marijuana despite the occupational, financial,

relationship, and psychological problems it caused him.

At age 27, Mr. Smith first smoked crack cocaine. He smoked $100 worth on a daily basis for five

years. During this evaluation, he denied any use of crack in several years. However, during a

session at Bedrock Behavioral Health on October 11, 2015, he stated he used crack

“yesterday.” Mr. Smith said he snorted a “quarter ounce” of powder cocaine daily from ages nine

to 20, with no use since that time. He began snorting and smoking methamphetamine in 2014.

He said he used a gram every few months. He denied any use of methamphetamine since 2014

during this evaluation. However, he informed Bedrock staff on October 11, 2015, that he was

using methamphetamine “this week.” Mr. Smith reported that he developed tolerance for

stimulants, experienced withdrawal symptoms when he could not use them, craved them, spent

a great deal of time involved in activities related to his use of cocaine and methamphetamine,

had difficulty controlling his use of them, gave up important activities to use cocaine and

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title 3

methamphetamine, frequently drove a vehicle under the influence of them, and continued to use

stimulants despite the occupational, financial, relationship, and psychological problems it

caused him.

Mr. Smith denied any further use of illicit or other intoxicating substances, as well as any abuse

of prescription drugs.

LEGAL HISTORY: Mr. Smith reported he was arrested for the first time when he was 19 years

of age, for burglary and aggravated robbery. He served three years in prison for that offense.

His listed his other charges as possession, conveyance, burglary, aggravated robbery, and

felonious assault.

According to online court records, Mr. Smith has the following known adult legal history:

2000:

• Underage Purchase/Consume Alcohol Misrepresenting Age, M-1; and Possession

Dangerous Ordnance, M-1: Guilty of M-1 Prohibition Under 21. 60 days jail suspended

and 1 year probation.

• Aggravated Robbery with Firearm Specification and two counts Kidnapping with Firearm

Specifications: Guilty by plea of F-1 Aggravated Robbery, 2 years ODRC, suspended, 3

years ODRC. Filed 2 pro se motions for Judicial Release, denied.

2001:

• Burglary, F-2, and Possessing Criminal Tools, F-4: Guilty of F-2 Burglary and sentenced

to 2 years ODRC. Filed two pro se motions for Judicial Release, both denied.

2004:

• Possession of Cocaine, F-5: Guilty of F-5 Possession of Drugs, 3 years probation.

o Community Control Violation, F-5: Guilty, 27 days jail sanction, continued

probation.

o Community Control Violation, F-5: Guilty, had urine screen positive for cocaine

and failed to report. Six months jail, terminate probation.

2009:

• Possession Controlled Substance, F-4: Disposition not listed.

2013:

• Possession of Drugs, F-5: Dismissed.

• Illegal Conveyance of Weapons, F-3; Tampering with Evidence, F-3; and Possession of

Drugs, F-5: Plead Guilty to F-3 Illegal Conveyance.

2016:

• Instant Case: Pending.

MEDICAL HISTORY: Mr. Smith denied any current medical conditions, as well as any history of

surgery, seizure, stroke, coma, or traumatic brain injury.

PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY: With regard to outpatient treatment, Mr. Smith said he was

diagnosed with attention deficit disorder in the fifth or sixth grade. He indicated he only attended

one session and was not prescribed any medication. He next received mental health treatment

at approximately age 23, when he began going to Bedrock Behavioral Health because he

"started feeling and acting weird.” Mr. Smith said he was diagnosed “with bipolar” and took

medications for about a year. He said he later returned to that agency and was reportedly

diagnosed with schizophrenia. He said he disagrees with those diagnoses, believing instead

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title

4

that he has “split personalities” and “substance abuse disorder.” He said he has had several

inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations.

Mr. Smith said he would “see things, hear things” and “have anxiety.” This started in his late

20s. He said he saw “people and shadows” on a daily basis and heard “voices and whispers”

that told him to “do things, go places.” The defendant said he heard three male voices he did not

recognize inside his head. Mr. Smith denied any history of suicide attempts.

Records from Your Behavioral Healthcare indicate Mr. Smith presented with psychosis on

January 1, 2014, with symptoms including paranoid delusions. He carried knives around to

protect himself. He was discharged two days later. He was diagnosed with psychotic disorder

not otherwise specified, amphetamine dependence, and antisocial personality disorder, but

amphetamine-induced psychosis was ruled out. Mr. Smith returned on September 1, 2014, and

presented with bizarre behaviors, including carrying a box cutter in his pocket, believing he was

being followed by others, hearing stomping sounds, seeing things shaking, and believing his

mother may be kidnapped and killed. His toxicology screen was positive for amphetamines. He

was referred for inpatient admission.

Mr. Smith was admitted from September 1, 2014, to September 30, 2014, and from October 1,

2014, to October 7, 2014. The first admission was voluntary and occurred after he had been

using amphetamines and had become paranoid, to the point of calling police about his

perceptions of stomping noises and tremors and of being followed. During the second

admission, Mr. Smith was suspicious and tense, looking around the room as if listening to

something. On the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST), Mr. Smith an

overall composite score of 14, which was highly elevated and indicated a strong likelihood of

malingering. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia versus stimulant-induced psychotic disorder,

amphetamine abuse, and marijuana abuse.

Records from Your Behavioral Health indicate Mr. Smith began treatment on October 8, 2014.

He was diagnosed with psychosis not otherwise specified. At his most recent session on

January 1, 2016, Mr. Smith was unable to fill out paperwork due to the severity of his symptoms.

Before speaking to the worker, he wanted to inspect her teeth. He had a Bible in his backpack

that he began ripping up. He appeared to be responding to internal stimuli and was paranoid.

Mr. Smith was unable to state how recently he used methamphetamines or cocaine.

Records from County Hospital indicate on January 1, 2016, Mr. Smith presented with delusions

and paranoid ideation. He reported that he had not slept in three days. His toxicology screen

was positive for amphetamines.

PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING: During test administration, Mr. Smith was excessively distracted

by stimuli outside of the testing room and often stared at the computer screen for multiple

minutes before selecting a response. Additionally, he stopped the testing at one point when

being questioned about somatic symptoms and said, “You just reminded me of how lightheaded

I am. I keep forgetting to tell them [medical staff] about it, but it happens every day. It’s the

fourth time today.”

On the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST), Mr. Smith earned a Total

score of 20, which is highly suggestive of malingered psychopathology. His self-report was

inconsistent with his observed behavior, and his subscale scores indicate that he endorsed very

extreme and uncommon symptoms. He reported symptom combinations that are both unlikely

and inconsistent with common mood and psychotic disorders. Mr. Smith also has an atypical

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title

5

presentation and a tendency to endorse severe and unusual psychotic symptoms. He reported

an unusual course of illness that is inconsistent with most psychiatric disorders recognized in

clinical practice and presented an overly negative view of himself that is not common in general

populations of psychiatric patients. Lastly, he endorsed an item that suggests a very uncommon

experience that authentic psychiatric patients rarely have.

Mr. Smith was administered the reading subtest of the Wide Range Achievement Test, fourth

edition (WRAT-4). He demonstrated a reading ability comparable to an 8.9 grade level by

earning a standard score of 85.

Mr. Smith completed the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, second edition

restructured form (MMPI-2-RF), a broadband measure of personality and psychopathology. He

did not respond to 35 items, which indicates a lack of cooperation with testing. As a result,

scores on some scales may underestimate the significance or severity of associated problems.

The resulting clinical protocol is invalid because of excessive variable response inconsistency,

attributable to his uncooperative test-taking approach. Mr. Smith appeared to over-report

psychological symptoms on the substantive, somatic, and cognitive scales. Over-reporting was

indicated by Mr. Smith endorsing an excessive amount of infrequent responses that is

uncommon even in individuals with genuine, severe psychological difficulties who report

credible symptoms. Over-reporting was also noted because he endorsed a considerably larger

than average number of symptoms rarely described by individuals with genuine, severe

psychopathology. Mr. Smith’s responses further indicate over-reporting of somatic symptoms

because he endorsed a considerably larger than average number of somatic symptoms rarely

described by individuals with genuine medical problems. Over-reporting was indicated by his

very unusual combination of responses that is associated with noncredible reporting of somatic

and/or cognitive symptoms. Additionally, over-reporting was indicated by Mr. Smith endorsing a

very unusual combination of responses that is strongly associated with noncredible memory

complaints. Given these indications of exaggeration or fabrication of psychological problems

and his noncooperative test-taking approach, the remainder of scales scored on the MMPI-2-RF

were unlikely to provide an accurate portrayal of Mr. Smith’s social, emotional, and behavioral

functioning, were considered invalid, and were not interpreted.

CLINICAL INTERVIEW: Mr. Smith is an African American male, 31 years old, six feet, one inch

tall and weighing approximately 196 pounds. He had short black hair, brown eyes, and a

moustache and goatee. He was dressed in standard jail attire and had good hygiene and

grooming. He provided information in a clear and coherent manner, and he did not demonstrate

any unusual physical movements.

Mr. Smith initially made intense, staring eye contact and provided slow responses to questions.

However, as the interview progressed, his eye contact became more appropriate and his

speech more conversational. When asked if was angry at the beginning of the interview, he

said, “Yes” because of “something from years ago.” He explained that he was upset that while in

college, his prison photo was put in the school newspaper, which enraged him. He said that

since that time, he has had difficulty controlling his anger. While discussing that, Mr. Smith

suddenly dropped his voice to a much lower octave and said something that was unintelligible to

the examiner, then reverted back to his normal speaking voice. When asked about that

behavior, Mr. Smith said that is a common experience that occurs daily, but he was unsure why.

When asked if had anything to do with the “split personalities” he mentioned earlier, he

enthusiastically replied, “Yes! That’s what happens! My voice changes and I turn into something

… something weird.” When asked to define what he turns into, he responded, “I don’t think it’s

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title

6

human … a demon or something.” When asked if the demon had a name, Mr. Smith said no.

When asked if anything else occurs when he is a demon besides his voice changing, he replied,

“I become angry. I start running into walls [that is, banging his head into the wall] and talking to

myself.” He said that during those periods, he is aware of “what that thing is telling me to do,”

such as “hurt things, destroy stuff.” When asked how he changes back from the demon to

himself again, Mr. Smith vaguely replied, “It takes a minute.” When asked if the process was

slow or gradual, he said, “Both.” When asked if he has ever told anyone about his “split

personalities,” he stated, “Just people close to me, but they blow it off like it’s nothing.”

Mr. Smith denied experiencing any current delusional beliefs or auditory or visual hallucinations,

and there was no indication by his behavior or speech that he was experiencing any perceptual

disturbances during this evaluation. He did not present with any observable symptoms of mania,

including an abnormally elevated or irritable mood, grandiosity, increased talkativeness, or

racing thoughts. In addition, Mr. Smith denied current suicidal and homicidal ideation.

During this evaluation, Mr. Smith was oriented to person, place, and partially to date. His recent

and remote memory were intact as demonstrated by his ability to recall past and recent

personal information. His attention and concentration were adequate, his insight was fair, and

he appeared to be functioning in the average range of intelligence.

COLLATERAL ACCOUNT OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED: Records from Police Department

indicate that on January 1, 2016, Mr. Smith stabbed a hospital security officer several times with

a knife he had concealed while being treated at County Hospital. A nurse intervened and told

Mr. Smith to stop. He then dropped the knife to the ground and complied with staff requests.

Mr. Smith had been committed to County Hospital due to “paranoid delusional thought content.”

His thinking was “disorganized.” Prior to talking with staff, he “requested to inspect staff’s teeth.”

He stated that he had not slept in three days.

When interviewed by detectives after his arrest, Mr. Smith explained that he “wanted to get a

number out of his cell phone which was in his property” in another room. The security officer

was assisting him with that process. He said he could not recall the actual stabbing incident, but

said the victim had “razor sharp teeth and he thought that he was going to eat him so that is why

he stabbed him.”

DEFENDANT’S ACCOUNT OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED: Mr. Smith reported that he had no

memory of the offense charged or the victim. He stated that during an interview with police

detectives, “They asked me what was going on and I really didn’t say anything to them” because

“I was afraid of them.” He explained he was scared because “they might eat me. I was seeing

vampires and all sorts of other stuff.” When asked if he actually thought the police were

vampires, Mr. Smith replied, “No.”

When asked what beliefs he had about the alleged victim, Mr. Smith replied, “I thought he was a

vampire and was trying to eat me,” which contradicted his earlier statement about having no

memory of the incident or the victim. When asked how he could tell if another was a vampire, he

responded, “Fanged teeth and elongated ears.”

Mr. Smith denied that he usually carried knives. He said he had one of them because it was his

friend’s and “I accidently took it from his house” and planned to return it. He said he had recently

purchased the second for “utility purposes.” He was unsure why he kept them on his person

while in the hospital.

Remove or Replace: Header Is Not Doc Title

7

Mr. Smith said felonious assault is wrong because “you can hurt them,” and he was aware that it

is illegal. However, he stated that he did not know the wrongfulness of his behavior at the time

of the offense charged because “I just didn’t know … I didn’t see anything wrong with it”

because “he was a vampire.”

MENTAL STATE AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED: Mr. Smith said that in the few

weeks before the offense, he was staying at a homeless shelter, went to the library every day to

watch movies, and was making numerous phone calls to old employers to obtain a job. He said

that he also worked a “couple days” through a temporary agency. Mr. Smith stated that in those

few weeks, he used marijuana once, cocaine twice, methamphetamines once, and alcohol

once. However, he said that he used no substances in the week preceding the offense charged.

Mr. Smith reported that on January 1, 2016, he was trying to visit his mother. However, he

“wasn’t feeling right” because “I was hearing voices and seeing things,” such as “vampires and

people that wasn’t there,” so he called a friend to take him to Your Behavioral Health. After that,

he was transported by ambulance to County Hospital.

DIAGNOSIS FOR THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED:

OPINION:

Respectfully Submitted,

Wilma Flintstone, Ph.D

Psychologist