Opinion ID: 308716
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: davila's mental status

Text: 72 This Court has rarely, if ever, had an opportunity to review a more extensive controversy as to a defendant's mental status at the time of an alleged offense. 73 The psychological and psychiatrical evidence was impressive. To avoid prolonging this opinion beyond that necessary to a decision, we now synopsize. 74 When the government rested and a motion for an instructed verdict of not guilty had been denied, the defense came forward with its proof of mental status as of the day of the alleged robbery. 75 If there is some evidence supporting a defendant's claim of insanity, the issue must be submitted to the jury. Once the hypothesis of insanity is established, the burden is on the prosecution to prove by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was sane at the time of the commission of the alleged crime and was possessed of the requisite criminal intent, Blake v. United States, 5 Cir., En Banc, 1969, 407 F.2d 908. 76
77 The first witness for the defendant was his mother, Mrs. Isabel Maria Nater, a social worker in Puerto Rico. The defendant was born September 24, 1946. He had been married four times. One marriage lasted nineteen days, one lasted two months, and a third lasted only a day. He was graduated from high school in Baja Vega, Puerto Rico, in 1963. As a child he was depressed because of the absence of his father, from whom his mother had been divorced when the defendant was three years of age. Defendant was obsessed with a desire to become a soldier and also to have a son. He enlisted in the Army, with her consent, 1964; trained at Fort Bliss, El Paso. He served in Korea and received an honorable discharge in 1966. He re-enlisted in 1967, shortly after he had married a girl in El Paso. Afterwards, he was in a military hospital in Columbus, Georgia, [for injuries sustained in a parachute jump]. He went AWOL and spent several months in Puerto Rico before the F.B.I. came for him. He went AWOL a second time and ultimately received a discharge under conditions other than honorable (undesirable). The mother took the son to a psychiatrist, Dr. Marcos Rosado Del Valle, in Puerto Rico, March 12, 1970. He disappeared on March 22 before he was to see the psychiatrist again on March 24. Mrs. Nater was of the opinion that on March 12, 1970, the defendant was of unsound mind. He came back to Puerto Rico in August, 1971 [right after the alleged bank robbery]. 78 On cross examination, Mrs. Nater testified: 79 Q. Mrs. Nater, did your son at any time discuss the examination conducted by the psychiatrist while he was in the Army? 80 A. I remember one occasion among many where he was examined by a psychiatrist in the Army. He talked to me something about it. 81 Q. All right. Can you tell this jury whether or not at that time the psychiatrist found him to be sane? 82 Defendant objects on the ground that the psychiatrist is not here to be examined. Objection overruled. 83 A. No, they found another disability, according to the doctor. 84 Q. What did your son tell you about that examination, Mrs. Nater? 85 A. My son was AWOL three or four times repeatedly after an accident, according to my information, because I was always seeking information from the Army. They would always take him to a psychiatrist of the Army and the psychiatrist of the Army would examine him and would treat him. At Puerto Rico he was seen by a psychiatrist as I have already said, at Ft. Buchanan. 86 Q. Mrs. Nater, I asked you one question, and the question was did your son ever tell you what the psychiatrist said about this mental capacity while he was in the Army? Did your son ever discuss this with you? 87 A. No, not that. 88 Q. That is all I am asking. Were you aware what the psychiatrists have said? Have you had a chance to see his Army medical records? 89 A. Yes, sir. 90 Q. All right. Your Honor at this point, I move Mr. Calamia tender to me the medical records he obtained from the District Clerk about his medical-may I have that, please? Counsel for defendant [Mr. Calamia]: 91 That is what we object to, Your Honor. We object to the reports signed by Kenneth M. Berc and Elmo M. Vinas, Jr., to the diagnosis and findings, because those are legal-those are medical conclusions and opinions that are not admissible and are hearsay since these people who made this report are not here to be cross examined. This portion of the report is hearsay and I move that it not be admitted. 92 THE COURT: This is proved up. The Court will admit the entire record, including this. 93 Whereupon, Government's Exhibit 4, duly certified by the National Archives and Record Service of the General Services Administration and by the Chief of the National Personnel Record Center at St. Louis was admitted into evidence. 94 Mrs. Nater was then asked whether she was able to identify Government Exhibit 4 as being personnel records of her son, Teodoro Davila-Nater. She stated that she had seen the records, including the report of Dr. Kenneth M. Berc, Psychiatrist. 95 The report, read to the jury, reads as follows: 96 . . . seen for psychiatric evaluation on 12 December, 1969. The subject related that he has been AWOL three times. He feels that he can't cope with the Army anymore because of his many problems back home. He has had three court martials and one Article 15. He has no civilian convictions. 97 Mental status examination reveals a well-oriented male with intact memory for recent, remote, and immediately past events. Judgment was intact in terms of simple actual situations. There was no evidence of fault disorder, delusions, or hallucinations. Affect was stable and appropriate. 98 Diagnosis: Emotionally unstable personality. 99 Findings: This man was and is mentally responsible both to distinguish right from wrong and adhere to the right. This man has the mental capacity to understand and participate in the board proceedings. This man has no disqualifying mental or physical disease or defect sufficient to warrant discharge through medical channels. This condition is not amenable to hospitalization, treatment, disciplinary action, training, or reclassification to another type of duty. This enlisted man will continue to be a noneffective soldier throughout his tour of duty. 100 Recommendations: 1. Psychiatrically cleared for any administrative or disciplinary action. 101 2. It is recommended that Teodoro Davila-Nater, Private, 482 84 8825 be separated from the service under the provisions of AR 635-212. 102 The next witness for the defendant was his sister, Mrs. Isabel Maria Davila, age twenty-seven, the divorced mother of three, then living with her mother in Puerto Rico. She testified that in November, 1969, she found her brother trying to hang himself with a rope to a tree of their yard in Puerto Rico. She called her grandmother and they got him down. Later, he told his sister that he had killed her mother [untrue]. The sister was later recalled to testify to another hanging episode in the laundry of the home, in which he was again saved by his sister and grandmother. She said she forgot about this incident when she was first on the witness stand. 103 [When Davila was examined at Springfield in February, 1972, he denied ever attempting suicide, as will be seen later]. 104 At this point, Dr. Marcos Rosado Del Valle, age 46, took the stand. He was a graduate in medicine of the University of Mexico and had completed a three year residency in psychiatry at the University of Puerto Rico. He saw the defendant on March 12, 1970, for one hour. He diagnosed him as a borderline patient, disorder of the character. On May 12, and May 14, 1972, nine months after the robbery, for a total of two and one half hours, he saw the defendant in jail at El Paso. No psychological tests were administered, but the doctor had the benefit of the Army report (Government's Exhibit 4) already alluded to. From his observation, and despite anything contained in that report, the psychiatrist was of the opinion, to a reasonable medical certainty, that on May 14, 1972, Davila had a disturbance of the personality with anti-social conduct, with a reaction of depressive-manic, an effective psychotic. 105 He was further of the opinion that on August 5, 1971, Davila was psychotic and going through an episode of mania-was mentally ill within the requirements of Blake. 106 The next witness called by the defense was Dr. R. G. Bennett, a board certified psychiatrist, who, from 1943 to 1951, had been a consultant psychiatrist for McNeil Island Federal Penitentiary. Dr. Bennett had interviewed members of the family, including the former in-laws and the ex-wife. He saw Davila September 30, 1971, October 3, 1971, and December 9, 1971. He had studied Davila's military and hospital records. He thought that on September 30 the defendant was perhaps mildly depressed to near normal, no illusion of systems. By December 9 he considered that Davila had a sociopathic personality disorder, but this may have just been the symptom of something more. He felt that Davila had been manic depressive, with periods of remission since 1967. Dr. Bennett's testimony concluded: 107 I feel it is highly probable that he was ill at that time [August 5, 1971] and he lacked substantial capacity to either appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. 2 108 On cross examination, the doctor testified: 109 No, I did not find him psychotic at the time I saw him [September 30, 1971]. 110 It was at this point that the defense took a highly significant step. Counsel for Davila, on redirect, asked Dr. Bennett if he had had an opportunity to look at Dr. Fain's report from Spring-field, Missouri, in this case? He responded in the affirmative and said that he disagreed with the diagnosis. 111 On re-cross, Dr. Bennett said he had also considered Government's Exhibit 4 [the military records; the report of Dr. Kenneth Berc] but that Davila might have been in remission at that time. 112 The next witness called by the defense was Dr. Milton Raskin, board certified psychiatrist, who had examined Davila the week before [May 11, 1972]. He had looked at the military hospital records. He found Nater to be a manic depressive. His opinion was that on August 5, 1971, the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect, within the rule of Blake. 113 On cross examination, Dr. Raskin stated that he had seen the report from the Bureau of Prisons, Springfield, Missouri, that of Dr. Fain and the other doctors that examined this defendant at Springfield, as well as the Berc report of December 17, 1969, and that Davila told him of his arrest for rape in Chicago on October 18, 1966, a bum rap. 114 At this point the defense rested. 115
116 The government called Dr. J. Edward Stern, a board certified psychiatrist. On September 28, 1971, and again on September 30, 1971, he had subjected Davila to an electroencephalographic [E.E.G.] test. The results were normal. 117 Dr. Ivan C. Smiley, a board certified radiologist, had interpreted a brain scan of the defendant and found it to be normal. 118 Dr. Clarence G. Hackett, a clinical psychologist, Ph.D. in psychology from Purdue University, a fellow of the American Psychological Association, at the request of Dr. R. J. Bennett [above mentioned] had administered to Davila the Welchler Adult Intelligence Scale Test, the Bonder Gestalt Test, and the Rorschach Test. 119 The Rorschach test had shown that Davila showed no evidence of any thinking disorder or really of any serious mental or emotional disturbance. He did feel from interview and testing that Davila had an antisocial personality disorder. He saw no evidence that Davila was a manic depressive. There was nothing in the examination to suggest that on August 5, 1971, the defendant had been unable to understand or comprehend the wrongful nature of his conduct and was quite capable of understanding the requirements of the law. Dr. Hackett had no basis for thinking that Davila on the day of the robbery suffered from any impairment of thinking or inability to conform to the law.
120 The District Court ordered the defendant admitted to the United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners at Springfield, Missouri, for an evaluation of his competency to stand trial, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 4244, and for an opinion as to responsibility at the time of the alleged offense. The Medical Center was directed to provide copies of its report to the Court, to the United States Attorney, and to defense counsel. 121 The defendant was admitted to the facility on February 10, 1972 and discharged March 21, with copies of the reports to the court and counsel on both sides. These reports constituted Government Exhibit 6, about which there was so much objection in the court below, and here. 122 The report of the psychiatric staff examination was signed, for the staff, by Dr. H. Wayne Glotfeltz, then Chief, Psychiatric Service. Omitting the preliminaries, that report was as follows: 123 Since admission to the Medical Center medical, physical and psychiatric examinations have been performed. The physical examination was essentially negative except for the history of former drug use, Marijuana, and a question of pulmonary tuberculosis. The sputum culture was normal flora. Routine blood, urine and VDRL were within normal limits. His blood type Rh factor is O positive. The skull x-ray and chest x-ray were within normal limits. The psychiatric opinion was passive-aggressive personality trait disturbance, inadequate personality with passive-aggressive trends. 124 On February 24, 1972, he was examined by a consulting psychologist who found no evidence of an active psychotic process. 125 On psychological examination it showed chronic personality disorder, characterized by poor impulsive control. 126 On March 2, 1972, he was interviewed by the staff, and discussed his activities of the past, and the alleged charges against him. He gave the staff no information that would indicate that any time in the past he had been considered incompetent or irresponsible. He lists his employment as a gigolo and has apparently been very successful living off various women who have supported him. In the future he would like to go to Spain and finish school as his grandfather who is quite wealthy in Puerto Rico stated he would assist him. 127 Therefore, if a competency hearing should be held the staff would recommend that he be adjudicated as competent and responsible. 128 Attached to this staff report was the written psychiatric examination report of Dr. H. B. Fain. This report mentioned no opinion as to Davila's mental responsibility on the day of the robbery or at any other time, although its terms negated, without specifically saying so, any psychotic condition. 129 At the trial, Dr. H. B. Fain, chief of psychiatry at the Springfield Medical Center (deputy chief at the time Davila was there) took the stand for the prosecution. Dr. Rochman had given the defendant a physical examination and neurological screening. Dr. Murney had performed a battery of psychiatric tests, object tests, written tests, general intelligence tests, the revised Benet test, the Bender Gestalt test, the Minnesota Multi-Facet Personality Inventory, which includes the neurotic scale, the schizophrenic scale and the organic scale, and the Rorschach psycho-diagnostic test. 130 At this point, the defense objected to any statement of the conclusions reached by Dr. Murney because he was not in court and not available for cross examination. The objection was overruled, the trial court holding that Dr. Fain could state any reports that he had from the staff members that helped him conduct this examination. 131 Dr. Fain then stated that Dr. Murney's conclusions were that the tests suggested 132 Characterogical problems with a neurotic overlay, and that there was some elevation on the neurotic triad which would indicate that this patient being tested had a lot of feelings of sexual inadequacy, that he also was somewhat anxious and had some depressive signs. He worries about his physical health a great deal. 133 But he did not find evidence of thought disturbance or psychosis, and we have his written report, which is a part of the official record. 134 Dr. Fain had, he said, used that report in arriving at his opinion of the subject's mental status. 135 Then, again over objection, Dr. Fain stated that the psychiatric staff came to the conclusion that Davila had the capacity to understand the charge, that he could cooperate with counsel and assist in his defense. 136 On the Revised Intelligence Test, Davila had scored an IQ of 98 and on the Welchler Adult Intelligence Scale he had scored 105 which is within average intelligence range. Dr. Fain further testified as follows: 137 On the morning of February 24, 1972, Mr. Davila arrived for his interview unescorted from his assignment within the institution. He proved to be oriented in all spheres and capable of expressing himself in a rational and coherent manner, despite minor problems in using the English language. 138 He impressed me as being bright, alert and responsive. From the outset he took the definite position that he had been falsely accused of the offense and that he can definitely prove that he was in Puerto Rico at the time the alleged offense occurred. Initially in the interview I got the impression that he was totally unaware of the circumstances or any of the individuals involved in the alleged crime but as the interview progressed I learned he knew both of the other individuals charged with the crime. 139