Psycholegal & Clinical Assessment Services
CALL US TODAY for a FREE CONSULTATION at 630-780-1085 or 404-504-7039 or visit our Contact Us page
Mitigating Factors Psychological Evaluations
Dr. Steven Gaskell at Psycholegal & Clinical Assessment Services offers psychological assessment of mitigating factors prior to a defendant entering a plea or prior to sentencing. Call us today at 630-780-1085 or 404-504-7039 for a Free Consultation and more information about any of our Forensic Psychological Evaluations
Even in situations where the defendant’s mental disorder does not meet the criteria for a not guilty by reason of insanity defense, the defendant’s state of mind at the time, as well as relevant past history of mental disorder and psychological abuse can be used to attempt a mitigation of sentence. Forensic Psychologist, Dr. Steven Gaskell’s evaluation and report is an important element in presenting evidence for sentence mitigation.
In Mitigating Factors at Sentencing cases, a defense attorney will ask for an assessment of his or her client’s personal history and determine whether or not congenital, intellectual, educational, socioeconomic, or developmental injuries or deprivations have predisposed the defendant to commit a crime or could reduce their culpability. These findings may then be offered to the court in an effort to reduce the severity of the sentence imposed on the defendant. “Mitigating factors” refer to information about a defendant or the circumstances of a crime that might tend to lessen the sentence or the crime with which the person is charged. “Aggravating factors”, refer to information about the defendant of the crime that may make the crime worse than similar crimes. Although such evaluations are typically conducted at the request of the defense, prosecutors may also obtain their own evaluator in order to gain an independent assessment or to challenge the findings of the defense expert.
Although each case is unique and may require additional testing or evaluation, most evaluations may include the following:
- Review of official records related to the specific offense (e.g., police records, witness statements)
- Review of background records and history (e.g., academic records, psychiatric/ psychological treatment records)
- Relevant background information
- Clinical interview of defendant
- Collateral interviews, as necessary
- Psychological testing
- Psychological evaluation of malingering
- Assessment of defendant’s state of mind close in time, leading up to, and during the offense based on interview with defendant and collateral information
- Diagnostic impressions
- Future risk assessment
- Summary of relevant mitigating and/or aggravating factors
- Recommendations
Relevant Landmark Cases
In Hamblin v. Mitchell, 335 F.3d 482 (6th Cir. 2003), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision of a lower court because counsel did not thoroughly investigate the defendant’s mental history in preparation for the sentencing phase of the trial. Specifically, the court stated that such investigation should include members of the defendant’s immediate and extended family, medical history, and family and social history (including physical and mental abuse, domestic violence, exposure to traumatic events and criminal violence). This issue was further addressed in Wiggins v. Smith and in Bigby v. Dretke.
