Opinion ID: 1918974
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Common Law Test for Standing Trial

Text: Defendant-relator contends that he cannot be tried because he has permanent amnesia as to everything that happened on December 20th and 21st, although he is now and at all other times was sane, sound and competent. The tests for ability to stand trial are twofold: (1) the so-called common law test, and (2) the tests set forth in the Mental Health Act of 1951, June 12, P.L. 533, § 101, 50 P.S. § 1071. It is a well established rule that one who is charged with a crime and who, before or during trial, is found to be insane, or mentally ill and mentally incapable of standing trial, may not be tried (or after conviction may not be sentenced or executed) while thus incapacitated. Commonwealth ex rel. Hilberry v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 534, 207 A. 2d 794; Commonwealth v. Novak, 395 Pa. 199, 150 A. 2d 102; Commonwealth v. Moon, 383 Pa. 18, 117 A. 2d 96; Commonwealth v. Scovern, 292 Pa. 26, 140 Atl. 611; 4 Blackstone, Commentaries, section 24. In Commonwealth v. Novak, 395 Pa., supra, the Court said (page 205): `. . ., the test at common law and employed by the courts in determining the mental capacity of a defendant to stand trial or to be sentenced or executed is not the M'Naghten right or wrong test but whether the defendant is able to comprehend his position and make a rational defense.': Commonwealth v. Moon, 383 Pa. 18, 23, 117 A. 2d 96. In other words, the accused must either be insane or so mentally ill as to be unable (a) to comprehend that he is accused of the terrible crime of murder and (b) to cooperate with his counsel in making a rational defense. Commonwealth ex rel. Hilberry v. Maroney, 417 Pa., supra. The facts in this case do not bring it within the foregoing authorities, or the principles enunciated therein.