Opinion ID: 353179
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Charges and Psychiatric Examination by Dr. Messinger.

Text: 32 On May 6, 1968, Suggs was arrested for feloniously assaulting a patrolman on the City College campus, where appellee may have taught karate. 8 Shortly thereafter he was charged with numerous rapes and robberies allegedly committed in April and May of 1968. 9 Because he was under nineteen years of age he reached seventeen in June of 1968 appellee was entitled to consideration for youthful offender treatment. The chief probation officer, Mr. Reeves, requested a prepleading psychiatric examination, 10 which was a fairly routine practice at that time in youthful offender cases. Suggs was examined first by a psychologist, 11 then by Dr. Messinger, a psychiatrist, at the Supreme Court Psychiatric Clinic on July 17, 1968, to assist the court in deciding whether youthful offender treatment was appropriate. 12 33 The psychological report is important since it was the basis for much of the subsequent psychiatric report of Dr. Messinger, the discovery of which caused our court to remand the previous grant of the writ in this case. This report explains that Suggs answers or not as he happens to feel at the moment, & refuses such tasks as he wishes. Much of the time he was angry and complaining, reciting various grievances, etc. He sat with his back turned to Ex. (examiner) for part of the time. Evidently his variable cooperation made for extreme swings on the psychological tests which ranged from defective to superior. The psychologist thought that Suggs had an intellectual potential well above average, but he has never submitted to the discipline of learning, so that he reads and spells at approximately a third grade level. Despite Suggs' lack of cooperation on most of the Rorschach tests, Suggs demonstrated that he is able to function very well when he is so inclined. The psychologist concluded that such projective material as we have, does not suggest a true thinking disorder, nor a psychosis. He impresses as willful, defensive, hostile, negativistic, paranoid, & anti-social. We would classify him as a narcissistic (sic ) behavior disorder 13 of extreme degree, a poor prognosis is quite likely. (Emphasis in original.) 34 A clinical history sheet evidently prepared by Dr. Messinger on July 17, 1968, shows only superficial mention of Suggs' prior unusual behavior. It refers to his stays at Wiltwyck and Warwick. Beyond this, little psychiatric information is revealed by the history. It indicates that Suggs complained of  'black-outs.'  It also quotes him as saying that (p)eople yell all the time. Suggs' inability to distinguish truth from fantasy is highlighted by much of the information he provided. 14 Suggs was initially diagnosed Without Psychosis, but pathologic, emotionally unstable, with depressive and paranoid trends. 35 On July 23, 1968, Dr. Messinger, who evidently had before him none of Suggs' psychiatric histories compiled at other institutions, submitted a formal report to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, indicating that (Suggs) is without psychosis and of average intelligence. The next four paragraphs discuss the psychological tests, mentioning appellee's composite I.Q. of 95, and quote the psychological report. Dr. Messinger's own observations were as follows: 36 At interview defendant displays a restless, truculent attitude as he tries to justify his habitual and extreme maladjustment on the conditions under which he was born and raised. He expresses violent antipathies towards his sister and his father, as well as all authority and parental surrogate figures. Review of his past shows that from his earliest years he has been indolent, rebellious, and intolerant of any restraint or restriction. He gets into fights both in and out of institutions and says, I don't need friends. If I make friends sooner or later they are my enemies. 37 Defendant's personality classification seems best described as that of the Pathologic Personality Group. Emotionally Unstable Type, with depressive and paranoid trends. 15 38 The court's copy of this report apparently went astray. It was not in the court file at the time of the plea proceedings before Justice Nunez. Its existence did not become known until April 1, 1975, when it was discovered by an Assistant Attorney General while the first appeal to this court from Judge Duffy's initial issuance of the writ was pending. 39