Missouri Statute | Act | Code |Criminal Procedure| US Code - US Statute | Chapter 552 Criminal Proceedings Involving Mental Illness

The terms "mental disease or defect" include congenital and
traumatic mental conditions as well as disease. They do not include an
abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial
conduct, whether or not such abnormality may be included under mental
illness, mental disease or defect in some classifications of mental
abnormality or disorder. The terms "mental disease or defect" do not
include alcoholism without psychosis or drug abuse without psychosis or
an abnormality manifested only by criminal sexual psychopathy as defined
in section 202.700, RSMo, nor shall anything in this chapter be construed
to repeal or modify the provisions of sections 202.700 to 202.770, RSMo.
(L. 1963 p. 674 § 1, A.L. 1969 p. 572)

(1965) This section's use of the term "mental disease or defect" was not
intended to designate any specific form or forms or medical
classification of mental disease, but merely means a mind sufficiently
disordered to cause the results indicated. State v. Garrett (Mo.), 391
S.W.2d 235.

(1975) Proper lay or medical testimony of drug addiction is admissible to
show extenuating or mitigating circumstances during parole revocation.
Reiter v. Camp (A.), 518 S.W.2d 82.

(1978) Loss of memory due to physical injury prevented defendant from
assisting in his defense and even though he understood proceedings
against him, he could not be tried. State ex rel. Sisco v. Buford (Mo.),
559 S.W.2d 747.

1. Evidence that the defendant did or did not suffer mental
disease or defect shall not be admissible in a criminal prosecution
except as provided in this section.

2. Evidence that the defendant did or did not suffer from a mental
disease or defect shall be admissible in a criminal proceeding:

(1) To determine whether the defendant lacks capacity to understand the
proceedings against him or to assist in his own defense as provided in
section 552.020;

(2) To determine whether the defendant is criminally responsible as
provided in section 552.030;

(3) To determine whether a person committed to the director of the
department of mental health pursuant to this chapter shall be released as
provided in section 552.040;

(4) To determine if a person in the custody of any correctional
institution needs care in a mental hospital as provided in section
552.050;

(5) To determine whether a person condemned to death shall be executed as
provided in sections 552.060 and 552.070;

(6) To determine whether or not the defendant, if found guilty, should be
sentenced to death as provided in chapter 558, RSMo;

(7) To determine the appropriate disposition of a defendant, if guilty,
as provided in sections 557.011 and 557.031, RSMo;

(8) To prove that the defendant did or did not have a state of mind which
is an element of the offense;

(9) To determine if the defendant, if found not guilty by reason of
mental disease or defect, should be immediately conditionally released by
the court under the provisions of section 552.040 to the community or
committed to a mental health or mental retardation facility. This
question shall not be asked regarding defendants charged with any of the
dangerous felonies as defined in section 556.061, RSMo, or with those
crimes set forth in subsection 11 of section 552.040, or the attempts
thereof. (L. 1985 S.B. 265 § 552.090, A.L. 1994 S.B. 763)

1. No person who as a result of mental disease or defect lacks
capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his
own defense shall be tried, convicted or sentenced for the commission of
an offense so long as the incapacity endures.

2. Whenever any judge has reasonable cause to believe that the accused
lacks mental fitness to proceed, he shall, upon his own motion or upon
motion filed by the state or by or on behalf of the accused, by order of
record, appoint one or more private psychiatrists or psychologists, as
defined in section 632.005, RSMo, or physicians with a minimum of one
year training or experience in providing treatment or services to
mentally retarded or mentally ill individuals, who are neither employees
nor contractors of the department of mental health for purposes of
performing the examination in question, to examine the accused; or shall
direct the director to have the accused so examined by one or more
psychiatrists or psychologists, as defined in section 632.005, RSMo, or
physicians with a minimum of one year training or experience in providing
treatment or services to mentally retarded or mentally ill individuals.
The order shall direct that a written report or reports of such
examination be filed with the clerk of the court. No private physician,
psychiatrist, or psychologist shall be appointed by the court unless he
has consented to act. The examinations ordered shall be made at such time
and place and under such conditions as the court deems proper; except
that, if the order directs the director of the department to have the
accused examined, the director, or his designee, shall determine the
time, place and conditions under which the examination shall be
conducted. The order may include provisions for the interview of
witnesses and may require the provision of police reports to the
department for use in evaluations. The department shall establish
standards and provide training for those individuals performing
examinations pursuant to this section and section 552.030. No individual
who is employed by or contracts with the department shall be designated
to perform an examination pursuant to this chapter unless the individual
meets the qualifications so established by the department. Any
examination performed pursuant to this subsection shall be completed and
filed with the court within sixty days of the order unless the court for
good cause orders otherwise. Nothing in this section or section 552.030
shall be construed to permit psychologists to engage in any activity not
authorized by chapter 337, RSMo. One pretrial evaluation shall be
provided at no charge to the defendant by the department. All costs of
subsequent evaluations shall be assessed to the party requesting the
evaluation.

3. A report of the examination made under this section shall include:

(1) Detailed findings;

(2) An opinion as to whether the accused has a mental disease or defect;

(3) An opinion based upon a reasonable degree of medical or psychological
certainty as to whether the accused, as a result of a mental disease or
defect, lacks capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to
assist in his own defense;

(4) A recommendation as to whether the accused should be held in custody
in a suitable hospital facility for treatment pending determination, by
the court, of mental fitness to proceed; and

(5) A recommendation as to whether the accused, if found by the court to
be mentally fit to proceed, should be detained in such hospital facility
pending further proceedings.

4. If the accused has pleaded lack of responsibility due to mental
disease or defect or has given the written notice provided in subsection
2 of section 552.030, the court shall order the report of the examination
conducted pursuant to this section to include, in addition to the
information required in subsection 3 of this section, an opinion as to
whether at the time of the alleged criminal conduct the accused, as a
result of mental disease or defect, did not know or appreciate the
nature, quality, or wrongfulness of his conduct or as a result of mental
disease or defect was incapable of conforming his conduct to the
requirements of law. A plea of not guilty by reason of mental disease or
defect shall not be accepted by the court in the absence of any such
pretrial evaluation which supports such a defense. In addition, if the
accused has pleaded not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, and
the alleged crime is not a dangerous felony as defined in section
556.061, RSMo, or those crimes set forth in subsection 11 of section
552.040, or the attempts thereof, the court shall order the report of the
examination to include an opinion as to whether or not the accused should
be immediately conditionally released by the court pursuant to the
provisions of section 552.040 or should be committed to a mental health
or mental retardation facility. If such an evaluation is conducted at the
direction of the director of the department of mental health, the court
shall also order the report of the examination to include an opinion as
to the conditions of release which are consistent with the needs of the
accused and the interest of public safety, including, but not limited to,
the following factors:

(1) Location and degree of necessary supervision of housing;

(2) Location of and responsibilities for appropriate psychiatric,
rehabilitation and aftercare services, including the frequency of such
services;

(3) Medication follow-up, including necessary testing to monitor
medication compliance;

(4) At least monthly contact with the department's forensic case monitor;

(5) Any other conditions or supervision as may be warranted by the
circumstances of the case.

5. If the report contains the recommendation that the accused should be
committed to or held in a suitable hospital facility pending
determination of the issue of mental fitness to proceed, and if the
accused is not admitted to bail or released on other conditions, the
court may order that the accused be committed to or held in a suitable
hospital facility pending determination of the issue of mental fitness to
proceed.

6. The clerk of the court shall deliver copies of the report to the
prosecuting or circuit attorney and to the accused or his counsel. The
report shall not be a public record or open to the public. Within ten
days after the filing of the report, both the defendant and the state
shall, upon written request, be entitled to an order granting them an
examination of the accused by a psychiatrist or psychologist, as defined
in section 632.005, RSMo, or a physician with a minimum of one year
training or experience in providing treatment or services to mentally
retarded or mentally ill individuals, of their own choosing and at their
own expense. An examination performed pursuant to this subsection shall
be completed and a report filed with the court within sixty days of the
date it is received by the department or private psychiatrist,
psychologist or physician unless the court, for good cause, orders
otherwise. A copy shall be furnished the opposing party.

7. If neither the state nor the accused nor his counsel requests a second
examination relative to fitness to proceed or contests the findings of
the report referred to in subsections 2 and 3 of this section, the court
may make a determination and finding on the basis of the report filed or
may hold a hearing on its own motion. If any such opinion is contested,
the court shall hold a hearing on the issue. The court shall determine
the issue of mental fitness to proceed and may impanel a jury of six
persons to assist in making the determination. The report or reports may
be received in evidence at any hearing on the issue but the party
contesting any opinion therein shall have the right to summon and to
cross-examine the examiner who rendered such opinion and to offer
evidence upon the issue.

8. At a hearing on the issue pursuant to subsection 7 of this section,
the accused is presumed to have the mental fitness to proceed. The burden
of proving that the accused does not have the mental fitness to proceed
is by a preponderance of the evidence and the burden of going forward
with the evidence is on the party raising the issue. The burden of going
forward shall be on the state if the court raises the issue.

9. If the court determines that the accused lacks mental fitness to
proceed, the criminal proceedings shall be suspended and the court shall
commit him to the director of the department of mental health.

10. Any person committed pursuant to subsection 9 of this section shall
be entitled to the writ of habeas corpus upon proper petition to the
court that committed him. The issue of the mental fitness to proceed
after commitment under subsection 9 of this section may also be raised by
a motion filed by the director of the department of mental health or by
the state, alleging the mental fitness of the accused to proceed. A
report relating to the issue of the accused's mental fitness to proceed
may be attached thereto. If the motion is not contested by the accused or
his counsel or if after a hearing on a motion the court finds the accused
mentally fit to proceed, or if he is ordered discharged from the
director's custody upon a habeas corpus hearing, the criminal proceedings
shall be resumed.

11. The following provisions shall apply after a commitment as provided
in this section:

(1) Six months after such commitment, the court which ordered the accused
committed shall order an examination by the head of the facility in which
the accused is committed, or a qualified designee, to ascertain whether
the accused is mentally fit to proceed and if not, whether there is a
substantial probability that the accused will attain the mental fitness
to proceed to trial in the foreseeable future. The order shall direct
that written report or reports of the examination be filed with the clerk
of the court within thirty days and the clerk shall deliver copies to the
prosecuting attorney or circuit attorney and to the accused or his
counsel. The report required by this subsection shall conform to the
requirements under subsection 3 of this section with the additional
requirement that it include an opinion, if the accused lacks mental
fitness to proceed, as to whether there is a substantial probability that
the accused will attain the mental fitness to proceed in the foreseeable
future;

(2) Within ten days after the filing of the report, both the accused and
the state shall, upon written request, be entitled to an order granting
them an examination of the accused by a psychiatrist or psychologist, as
defined in section 632.005, RSMo, or a physician with a minimum of one
year training or experience in providing treatment or services to
mentally retarded or mentally ill individuals, of their own choosing and
at their own expense. An examination performed pursuant to this
subdivision shall be completed and filed with the court within thirty
days unless the court, for good cause, orders otherwise. A copy shall be
furnished to the opposing party;

(3) If neither the state nor the accused nor his counsel requests a
second examination relative to fitness to proceed or contests the
findings of the report referred to in subdivision (1) of this subsection,
the court may make a determination and finding on the basis of the report
filed, or may hold a hearing on its own motion. If any such opinion is
contested, the court shall hold a hearing on the issue. The report or
reports may be received in evidence at any hearing on the issue but the
party contesting any opinion therein relative to fitness to proceed shall
have the right to summon and to cross-examine the examiner who rendered
such opinion and to offer evidence upon the issue;

(4) If the accused is found mentally fit to proceed, the criminal
proceedings shall be resumed;

(5) If it is found that the accused lacks mental fitness to proceed but
there is a substantial probability the accused will be mentally fit to
proceed in the reasonably foreseeable future, the court shall continue
such commitment for a period not longer than six months, after which the
court shall reinstitute the proceedings required under subdivision (1) of
this subsection;

(6) If it is found that the accused lacks mental fitness to proceed and
there is no substantial probability that the accused will be mentally fit
to proceed in the reasonably foreseeable future, the court shall dismiss
the charges without prejudice and the accused shall be discharged, but
only if proper proceedings have been filed under chapter 632 or chapter
475, RSMo, in which case those sections and no others will be applicable.
The probate division of the circuit court shall have concurrent
jurisdiction over the accused upon the filing of a proper pleading to
determine if the accused shall be involuntarily detained under chapter
632, RSMo, or to determine if the accused shall be declared incapacitated
under chapter 475, RSMo, and approved for admission by the guardian under
section 632.120 or 633.120, RSMo, to a mental health or retardation
facility. When such proceedings are filed, the criminal charges shall be
dismissed without prejudice if the court finds that the accused is
mentally ill and should be committed or that he is incapacitated and
should have a guardian appointed. The period of limitation on prosecuting
any criminal offense shall be tolled during the period that the accused
lacks mental fitness to proceed.

12. If the question of the accused's mental fitness to proceed was raised
after a jury was impaneled to try the issues raised by a plea of not
guilty and the court determines that the accused lacks the mental fitness
to proceed or orders the accused committed for an examination pursuant to
this section, the court may declare a mistrial. Declaration of a mistrial
under these circumstances, or dismissal of the charges pursuant to
subsection 11 of this section, does not constitute jeopardy, nor does it
prohibit the trial, sentencing or execution of the accused for the same
offense after he has been found restored to competency.

13. The result of any examinations made pursuant to this section shall
not be a public record or open to the public.

14. No statement made by the accused in the course of any examination or
treatment pursuant to this section and no information received by any
examiner or other person in the course thereof, whether such examination
or treatment was made with or without the consent of the accused or upon
his motion or upon that of others, shall be admitted in evidence against
the accused on the issue of guilt in any criminal proceeding then or
thereafter pending in any court, state or federal. A finding by the court
that the accused is mentally fit to proceed shall in no way prejudice the
accused in a defense to the crime charged on the ground that at the time
thereof he was afflicted with a mental disease or defect excluding
responsibility, nor shall such finding by the court be introduced in
evidence on that issue nor otherwise be brought to the notice of the
jury. (L. 1963 p. 674 § 2, A.L. 1969 p. 572, A.L. 1971 S.B. 171, A.L.
1980 H.B. 1724, A.L. 1985 S.B. 265, A.L. 1994 S.B. 763, A.L. 1997 S.B. 56)

(1972) Where a copy of report of mental examination was furnished to
prosecutor and contained a statement of facts made by appellant to the
doctor concerning the crime with which he was charged but there was
nothing in record, and appellant pointed to nothing, indicating that
prosecutor thereby obtained information concerning the case not otherwise
available to him, court did not err in failing to dismiss information.
State v. Franklin (Mo.), 482 S.W.2d 420.

(1972) This section does not apply to post trial procedure. A conviction
while defendant is legally incompetent violates due process. Brown v.
State (Mo.), 485 S.W.2d 424.

(1973) State may not order commitment without express written notice that
no other defense exists. Ex parte Kent (Mo.), 490 S.W.2d 649; Cert.
denied 94 S.Ct. 596.

(1973) Attempted suicide during trial did not require trial judge to
order psychiatric examination under this section. Scope of discretion of
trial judge discussed. Drope v. State (A.), 498 S.W.2d 838.

(1973) Held that pretrial psychiatric examination report became a record
in the criminal proceeding and court could take judicial notice of its
contents when considering a motion to vacate. State v. Conner (A.), 500
S.W.2d 300.

(1975) After receiving report of psychiatric examination indicating
defendant's competency, his attorney was under no duty to contest the
results and in order to charge his attorney with ineffective assistance
defendant movant is required to show some basis for questioning the
report. Shubert v. State (A.), 518 S.W.2d 326.

(1975) This section constitutionally adequate to protect rights of
accused. Suicide attempt during trial and psychiatric information
available prior to trial together with testimony as to "strange behavior"
creates a sufficient doubt of competence so as to require further inquiry
on the question of competence. Drope v. Missouri (U.S.), 95 S.Ct. 896.

(1975) Magistrate at preliminary hearing has jurisdiction to inquire into
accused's mental fitness to proceed. State v. Morgett (A.), 526 S.W.2d
434.

(1976) Held, examination by osteopath who was not a "licensed
psychiatrist" met the requirements of this section. State v. Mullen (A.),
532 S.W.2d 794.

(1976) Held, defendant is entitled to a competency hearing even though
motion was not filed until day of trial. Motion may be made anytime prior
to sentencing. State v. Carroll (A.), 543 S.W.2d 48.

(1976) Held, that if report is contested the court must hold a competency
hearing. State v. Carroll (A.), 543 S.W.2d 48.

(1977) Defense counsel should be allowed to express opinion as to
defendant's competency to stand trial. Issue of competency is not waived
by going to trial since a mental incompetent lacks capacity to understand
a right, much less give it up. State v. Clark (A.), 546 S.W.2d 455.

(1981) The accused, for the purpose of attempting to establish his
partial responsibility or his diminished capacity, may introduce evidence
obtained in the section 552.020 examination. State v. Strubberg (Mo.),
616 S.W.2d 809.

1. A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if, at the
time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect such person
was incapable of knowing and appreciating the nature, quality, or
wrongfulness of such person's conduct.

2. Evidence of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility shall
not be admissible at trial of the accused unless the accused, at the time
of entering such accused's plea to the charge, pleads not guilty by
reason of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility, or unless
within ten days after a plea of not guilty, or at such later date as the
court may for good cause permit, the accused files a written notice of
such accused's purpose to rely on such defense. Such a plea or notice
shall not deprive the accused of other defenses. The state may accept a
defense of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility, whether
raised by plea or written notice, if the accused has no other defense and
files a written notice to that effect. The state shall not accept a
defense of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility in the
absence of any pretrial evaluation as described in this section or
section 552.020. Upon the state's acceptance of the defense of mental
disease or defect excluding responsibility, the court shall proceed to
order the commitment of the accused as provided in section 552.040 in
cases of persons acquitted on the ground of mental disease or defect
excluding responsibility, and further proceedings shall be had regarding
the confinement and release of the accused as provided in section 552.040.

3. Whenever the accused has pleaded mental disease or defect excluding
responsibility or has given the written notice provided in subsection 2
of this section, and such defense has not been accepted as provided in
subsection 2 of this section, the court shall, after notice and upon
motion of either the state or the accused, by order of record, appoint
one or more private psychiatrists or psychologists, as defined in section
632.005, RSMo, or physicians with a minimum of one year training or
experience in providing treatment or services to mentally retarded or
mentally ill individuals, who are neither employees nor contractors of
the department of mental health for purposes of performing the
examination in question, to examine the accused, or shall direct the
director of the department of mental health, or the director's designee,
to have the accused so examined by one or more psychiatrists or
psychologists, as defined in section 632.005, RSMo, or physicians with a
minimum of one year training or experience in providing treatment or
services to mentally retarded or mentally ill individuals designated by
the director, or the director's designee, as qualified to perform
examinations pursuant to this chapter. The order shall direct that
written report or reports of such examination be filed with the clerk of
the court. No private psychiatrist, psychologist, or physician shall be
appointed by the court unless such psychiatrist, psychologist or
physician has consented to act. The examinations ordered shall be made at
such time and place and under such conditions as the court deems proper;
except that, if the order directs the director of the department of
mental health to have the accused examined, the director, or the
director's designee, shall determine the time, place and conditions under
which the examination shall be conducted. The order may include
provisions for the interview of witnesses and may require the provision
of police reports to the department for use in evaluation. If an
examination provided in section 552.020 was made and the report of such
examination included an opinion as to whether, at the time of the alleged
criminal conduct, the accused, as a result of mental disease or defect,
did not know or appreciate the nature, quality or wrongfulness of such
accused's conduct or as a result of mental disease or defect was
incapable of conforming such accused's conduct to the requirements of
law, such report may be received in evidence, and no new examination
shall be required by the court unless, in the discretion of the court,
another examination is necessary. If an examination is ordered pursuant
to this section, the report shall contain the information required in
subsections 3 and 4 of section 552.020. Within ten days after receiving a
copy of such report, both the accused and the state shall, upon written
request, be entitled to an order granting them an examination of the
accused by an examiner of such accused's or its own choosing and at such
accused's or its expense. The clerk of the court shall deliver copies of
the report or reports to the prosecuting or circuit attorney and to the
accused or his counsel. No reports required by this subsection shall be
public records or be open to the public. Any examination performed
pursuant to this subsection shall be completed and the results shall be
filed with the court within sixty days of the date it is received by the
department or private psychiatrist, psychologist or physician unless the
court, for good cause, orders otherwise.

4. If the report contains the recommendation that the accused should be
held in custody in a suitable hospital facility pending trial, and if the
accused is not admitted to bail, or released on other conditions, the
court may order that the accused be committed to or held in a suitable
hospital facility pending trial.

5. No statement made by the accused in the course of any such examination
and no information received by any physician or other person in the
course thereof, whether such examination was made with or without the
consent of the accused or upon the accused's motion or upon that of
others, shall be admitted in evidence against the accused on the issue of
whether the accused committed the act charged against the accused in any
criminal proceeding then or thereafter pending in any court, state or
federal. The statement or information shall be admissible in evidence for
or against the accused only on the issue of the accused's mental
condition, whether or not it would otherwise be deemed to be a privileged
communication. If the statement or information is admitted for or against
the accused on the issue of the accused's mental condition, the court
shall, both orally at the time of its admission and later by instruction,
inform the jury that it must not consider such statement or information
as any evidence of whether the accused committed the act charged against
the accused.

6. All persons are presumed to be free of mental disease or defect
excluding responsibility for their conduct, whether or not previously
adjudicated in this or any other state to be or to have been sexual or
social psychopaths, or incompetent; provided, however, the court may
admit evidence presented at such adjudication based on its probative
value. The issue of whether any person had a mental disease or defect
excluding responsibility for such person's conduct is one for the trier
of fact to decide upon the introduction of substantial evidence of lack
of such responsibility. But, in the absence of such evidence, the
presumption shall be conclusive. Upon the introduction of substantial
evidence of lack of such responsibility, the presumption shall not
disappear and shall alone be sufficient to take that issue to the trier
of fact. The jury shall be instructed as to the existence and nature of
such presumption when requested by the state and, where the issue of such
responsibility is one for the jury to decide, the jury shall be told that
the burden rests upon the accused to show by a preponderance or greater
weight of the credible evidence that the defendant was suffering from a
mental disease or defect excluding responsibility at the time of the
conduct charged against the defendant. At the request of the defense the
jury shall be instructed by the court as to the contents of subsection 2
of section 552.040.

7. When the accused is acquitted on the ground of mental disease or
defect excluding responsibility, the verdict and the judgment shall so
state as well as state the offense for which the accused was acquitted.
The clerk of the court shall furnish a copy of any judgment or order of
commitment to the department of mental health pursuant to this section to
the criminal records central repository pursuant to section 43.503, RSMo.
(L. 1963 p. 674 § 3, A.L. 1969 p. 572, A.L. 1980 H.B. 1724, A.L. 1985
S.B. 265, A.L. 1993 S.B. 180, A.L. 1994 S.B. 763, A.L. 1999 H.B. 328)

(1966) Statement by psychiatrist that defendant, charged with murder, was
not suffering from a mental disease or defect excluding responsibility
for the acts with which he was charged, and that "treatment or
rehabilitation of the type of disorder shown by this man would be of no
avail with the methods available today. If unrestrained further
antisocial acts by this man will undoubtedly recur in the same way as in
the past" was not admissible as it was highly prejudicial to defendant's
right to be tried only for the offense with which he was charged. State
v. Nickens (Mo.), 403 S.W.2d 582.

(1969) The purpose of this section is to prevent the surprise use of the
defense of insanity precluding adequate rebuttal by the prosecution.
State v. Holmes (Mo.), 439 S.W.2d 518.

(1973) Criminal defendant is presumed to be free of mental disease unless
defendant introduces substantial evidence of lack of responsibility,
whereupon the matter becomes one for the trier of facts. In absence of
such evidence, the presumption is conclusive. State v. Bacon (A.), 501
S.W.2d 499.

(1974) Held written notice of no other defense is prerequisite to
acceptance of intent to enter plea of guilty by reason of mental disease
or defect and basing commitment on such notice of intent to plead without
hearing. Briggs v. State (A.), 509 S.W.2d 154.

(1974) Held that if defendant requests a "commitment" instruction it is
mandatory for the court to give one if evidence of mental disease or
defect was present. State v. Pike (A.), 516 S.W.2d 505.

(1974) When the General Assembly adopted provisions of the Model Penal
Code, it did so with the intention of adopting the accompanying
interpretation thereof by the drafters of that provision. State v.
Anderson (Mo. banc), 515 S.W.2d 534.

(1981) Subsection 3 of section 552.030 is an exception to the general bar
enunciated in 552.020 precluding use of statements made by the accused in
the course of any examination or treatment on the issue of guilt. State
v. Strubberg (Mo.), 616 S.W.2d 809.

(1981) The accused, for the purpose of attempting to establish his
partial responsibility or his diminished capacity, may introduce evidence
obtained in the section 552.020 examination. State v. Strubberg (Mo.),
616 S.W.2d 809.

(1981) The partial responsibility doctrine may not be used by a defendant
to avoid all criminal responsibility for his acts; to expunge himself of
all criminal responsibility by reason of a mental disease or defect, the
defendant must plead not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect and
must comply with all the conditions of the statute. State v. Strubberg
(Mo.), 616 S.W.2d 809.

1. For the purposes of this section, the following words mean:

(1) "Prosecutor of the jurisdiction", the prosecuting attorney in a
county or the circuit attorney of a city not within a county;

(2) "Secure facility", a state mental health facility, state mental
retardation facility, private facility under contract with the department
of mental health, or a section within any of these facilities, in which
persons committed to the department of mental health pursuant to this
chapter, shall not be permitted to move about the facility or section of
the facility, nor to leave the facility or section of the facility,
without approval by the head of the facility or such head's designee and
adequate supervision consistent with the safety of the public and the
person's treatment, habilitation or rehabilitation plan;

(3) "Tried and acquitted" includes both pleas of mental disease or defect
excluding responsibility that are accepted by the court and acquittals on
the ground of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility following
the proceedings set forth in section 552.030.

2. When an accused is tried and acquitted on the ground of mental disease
or defect excluding responsibility, the court shall order such person
committed to the director of the department of mental health for custody.
The court shall also order custody and care in a state mental health or
retardation facility unless an immediate conditional release is granted
pursuant to this section. If the accused has not been charged with a
dangerous felony as defined in section 556.061, RSMo, or with murder in
the first degree pursuant to section 565.020, RSMo, or sexual assault
pursuant to section 566.040, RSMo, or the attempts thereof, and the
examination contains an opinion that the accused should be immediately
conditionally released to the community by the court, the court shall
hold a hearing to determine if an immediate conditional release is
appropriate pursuant to the procedures for conditional release set out in
subsections 10 to 14 of this section. Prior to the hearing, the court
shall direct the director of the department of mental health, or the
director's designee, to have the accused examined to determine conditions
of confinement in accordance with subsection 4 of section 552.020. The
provisions of subsection 16 of this section shall be applicable to
defendants granted an immediate conditional release and the director
shall honor the immediate conditional release as granted by the court. If
the court determines that an immediate conditional release is warranted,
the court shall order the person committed to the director of the
department of mental health before ordering such a release. The court
granting the immediate conditional release shall retain jurisdiction over
the case for the duration of the conditional release. This shall not
limit the authority of the director of the department of mental health or
the director's designee to revoke the conditional release or the trial
release of any committed person pursuant to subsection 17 of this
section. If the accused is committed to a mental health or mental
retardation facility, the director of the department of mental health, or
the director's designee, shall determine the time, place and conditions
of confinement.

3. The provisions of sections 630.110, 630.115, 630.130, 630.133,
630.135, 630.140, 630.145, 630.150, 630.180, 630.183, 630.192, 630.194,
630.196, 630.198, 630.805, 632.370, 632.395, and 632.435, RSMo, shall
apply to persons committed pursuant to subsection 2 of this section. If
the department does not have a treatment or rehabilitation program for a
mental disease or defect of an individual, that fact may not be the basis
for a release from commitment. Notwithstanding any other provision of law
to the contrary, no person committed to the department of mental health
who has been tried and acquitted by reason of mental disease or defect as
provided in section 552.030 shall be conditionally or unconditionally
released unless the procedures set out in this section are followed. Upon
request by an indigent committed person, the appropriate court may
appoint the office of the public defender to represent such person in any
conditional or unconditional release proceeding under this section.

4. Notwithstanding section 630.115, RSMo, any person committed pursuant
to subsection 2 of this section shall be kept in a secure facility until
such time as a court of competent jurisdiction enters an order granting a
conditional or unconditional release to a nonsecure facility.

5. The committed person or the head of the facility where the person is
committed may file an application in the court that committed the person
seeking an order releasing the committed person unconditionally; except
that any person who has been denied an application for a conditional
release pursuant to subsection 13 of this section shall not be eligible
to file for an unconditional release until the expiration of one year
from such denial. In the case of a person who was immediately
conditionally released after being committed to the department of mental
health, the released person or the director of the department of mental
health, or the director's designee, may file an application in the same
court that released the committed person seeking an order releasing the
committed person unconditionally. Copies of the application shall be
served personally or by certified mail upon the head of the facility
unless the head of the facility files the application, the committed
person unless the committed person files the application, or unless the
committed person was immediately conditionally released, the director of
the department of mental health, and the prosecutor of the jurisdiction
where the committed person was tried and acquitted. Any party objecting
to the proposed release must do so in writing within thirty days after
service. Within a reasonable period of time after any written objection
is filed, which period shall not exceed sixty days unless otherwise
agreed upon by the parties, the court shall hold a hearing upon notice to
the committed person, the head of the facility, if necessary, the
director of the department of mental health, and the prosecutor of the
jurisdiction where the person was tried. Prior to the hearing any of the
parties, upon written application, shall be entitled to an examination of
the committed person, by a psychiatrist or psychologist, as defined in
section 632.005, RSMo, or a physician with a minimum of one year training
or experience in providing treatment or services to mentally retarded or
mentally ill individuals of its own choosing and at its expense. The
report of the mental condition of the committed person shall accompany
the application. By agreement of all parties to the proceeding any report
of the mental condition of the committed person which may accompany the
application for release or which is filed in objection thereto may be
received by evidence, but the party contesting any opinion therein shall
have the right to summon and to cross-examine the examiner who rendered
such opinion and to offer evidence upon the issue.

6. By agreement of all the parties and leave of court, the hearing may be
waived, in which case an order granting an unconditional release shall be
entered in accordance with subsection 8 of this section.

7. At a hearing to determine if the committed person should be
unconditionally released, the court shall consider the following factors
in addition to any other relevant evidence:

(1) Whether or not the committed person presently has a mental disease or
defect;

(2) The nature of the offense for which the committed person was
committed;

(3) The committed person's behavior while confined in a mental health
facility;

(4) The elapsed time between the hearing and the last reported unlawful
or dangerous act;

(5) Whether the person has had conditional releases without incident; and

(6) Whether the determination that the committed person is not dangerous
to himself or others is dependent on the person's taking drugs, medicine
or narcotics. The burden of persuasion for any person committed to a
mental health facility under the provisions of this section upon
acquittal on the grounds of mental disease or defect excluding
responsibility shall be on the party seeking unconditional release to
prove by clear and convincing evidence that the person for whom
unconditional release is sought does not have, and in the reasonable
future is not likely to have, a mental disease or defect rendering the
person dangerous to the safety of himself or others.

8. The court shall enter an order either denying the application for
unconditional release or granting an unconditional release. An order
denying the application shall be without prejudice to the filing of
another application after the expiration of one year from the denial of
the last application.

9. No committed person shall be unconditionally released unless it is
determined through the procedures in this section that the person does
not have, and in the reasonable future is not likely to have, a mental
disease or defect rendering the person dangerous to the safety of himself
or others.

10. The committed person or the head of the facility where the person is
committed may file an application in the court having probate
jurisdiction over the facility where the person is detained for a hearing
to determine whether the committed person shall be released
conditionally. In the case of a person committed to a mental health
facility upon acquittal on the grounds of mental disease or defect
excluding responsibility for a dangerous felony as defined in section
556.061, RSMo, murder in the first degree pursuant to section 565.020,
RSMo, or sexual assault pursuant to section 566.040, RSMo, any such
application shall be filed in the court that committed the person. In
such cases, jurisdiction over the application for conditional release
shall be in the committing court. In the case of a person who was
immediately conditionally released after being committed to the
department of mental health, the released person or the director of the
department of mental health, or the director's designee, may file an
application in the same court that released the person seeking to amend
or modify the existing release. The procedures for application for
unconditional releases set out in subsection 5 of this section shall
apply, with the following additional requirements:

(1) A copy of the application shall also be served upon the prosecutor of
the jurisdiction where the person is being detained, unless the released
person was immediately conditionally released after being committed to
the department of mental health, or unless the application was required
to be filed in the court that committed the person in which case a copy
of the application shall be served upon the prosecutor of the
jurisdiction where the person was tried and acquitted and the prosecutor
of the jurisdiction into which the committed person is to be released;

(2) The prosecutor of the jurisdiction where the person was tried and
acquitted shall use their best efforts to notify the victims of dangerous
felonies. Notification by the appropriate person or agency by certified
mail to the most current address provided by the victim shall constitute
compliance with the victim notification requirement of this section;

(3) The application shall specify the conditions and duration of the
proposed release;

(4) The prosecutor of the jurisdiction where the person is being detained
shall represent the public safety interest at the hearing unless the
prosecutor of the jurisdiction where the person was tried and acquitted
decides to appear to represent the public safety interest. If the
application for release was required to be filed in the committing court,
the prosecutor of the jurisdiction where the person was tried and
acquitted shall represent the public safety interest. In the case of a
person who was immediately conditionally released after being committed
to the department of mental health, the prosecutor of the jurisdiction
where the person was tried and acquitted shall appear and represent the
public safety interest.

11. By agreement of all the parties, the hearing may be waived, in which
case an order granting a conditional release, stating the conditions and
duration agreed upon by all the parties and the court, shall be entered
in accordance with subsection 13 of this section.

12. At a hearing to determine if the committed person should be
conditionally released, the court shall consider the following factors in
addition to any other relevant evidence:

(1) The nature of the offense for which the committed person was
committed;

(2) The person's behavior while confined in a mental health facility;

(3) The elapsed time between the hearing and the last reported unlawful
or dangerous act;

(4) The nature of the person's proposed release plan;

(5) The presence or absence in the community of family or others willing
to take responsibility to help the defendant adhere to the conditions of
the release; and

(6) Whether the person has had previous conditional releases without
incident. The burden of persuasion for any person committed to a mental
health facility under the provisions of this section upon acquittal on
the grounds of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility shall be
on the party seeking release to prove by clear and convincing evidence
that the person for whom release is sought is not likely to be dangerous
to others while on conditional release.

13. The court shall enter an order either denying the application for a
conditional release or granting conditional release. An order denying the
application shall be without prejudice to the filing of another
application after the expiration of one year from the denial of the last
application.

14. No committed person shall be conditionally released until it is
determined that the committed person is not likely to be dangerous to
others while on conditional release.

15. If, in the opinion of the head of a facility where a committed person
is being detained, that person can be released without danger to others,
that person may be released from the facility for a trial release of up
to ninety-six hours under the following procedure:

(1) The head of the facility where the person is committed shall notify
the prosecutor of the jurisdiction where the committed person was tried
and acquitted and the prosecutor of the jurisdiction into which the
committed person is to be released at least thirty days before the date
of the proposed trial release;

(2) The notice shall specify the conditions and duration of the release;

(3) If no prosecutor to whom notice is required objects to the trial
release, the committed person shall be released according to conditions
and duration specified in the notice;

(4) If any prosecutor objects to the trial release, the head of the
facility may file an application with the court having probate
jurisdiction over the facility where the person is detained for a hearing
under the procedures set out in subsections 5 and 10 of this section with
the following additional requirements:

(a) A copy of the application shall also be served upon the prosecutor of
the jurisdiction into which the committed person is to be released; and

(b) The prosecutor or prosecutors who objected to the trial release shall
represent the public safety interest at the hearing; and

(5) The release criteria of subsections 12 to 14 of this section shall
apply at such a hearing.

16. The department shall provide or shall arrange for follow-up care and
monitoring for all persons conditionally released under this section and
shall make or arrange for reviews and visits with the client at least
monthly, or more frequently as set out in the release plan, and whether
the client is receiving care, treatment, habilitation or rehabilitation
consistent with his needs, condition and public safety. The department
shall identify the facilities, programs or specialized services operated
or funded by the department which shall provide necessary levels of
follow-up care, aftercare, rehabilitation or treatment to the persons in
geographical areas where they are released.

17. The director of the department of mental health, or the director's
designee, may revoke the conditional release or the trial release and
request the return of the committed person if such director or
coordinator has reasonable cause to believe that the person has violated
the conditions of such release. If requested to do so by the director or
coordinator, a peace officer of a jurisdiction in which a patient on
conditional release is found shall apprehend and return such patient to
the facility. No peace officer responsible for apprehending and returning
the committed person to the facility upon the request of the director or
coordinator shall be civilly liable for apprehending or transporting such
patient to the facility so long as such duties were performed in good
faith and without negligence. If a person on conditional release is
returned to a facility under the provisions of this subsection, a hearing
shall be held within ninety-six hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and
state holidays, to determine whether the person violated the conditions
of the release or whether resumption of full-time hospitalization is the
least restrictive alternative consistent with the person's needs and
public safety. The director of the department of mental health, or the
director's designee, shall conduct the hearing. The person shall be given
notice at least twenty-four hours in advance of the hearing and shall
have the right to have an advocate present.

18. At any time during the period of a conditional release or trial
release, the court which ordered the release may issue a notice to the
released person to appear to answer a charge of a violation of the terms
of the release and the court may issue a warrant of arrest for the
violation. Such notice shall be personally served upon the released
person. The warrant shall authorize the return of the released person to
the custody of the court or to the custody of the director of mental
health or the director's designee.

19. The head of a mental health facility, upon any notice that a
committed person has escaped confinement, or left the facility or its
grounds without authorization, shall immediately notify the prosecutor
and sheriff of the county wherein the committed person is detained of the
escape or unauthorized leaving of grounds and the prosecutor and sheriff
of the county where the person was tried and acquitted.

20. Any person committed to a mental health facility under the provisions
of this section upon acquittal on the grounds of mental disease or defect
excluding responsibility for a dangerous felony as defined in section
556.061, RSMo, murder in the first degree pursuant to section 565.020,
RSMo, or sexual assault pursuant to section 566.040, RSMo, shall not be
eligible for conditional or unconditional release under the provisions of
this section unless, in addition to the requirements of this section, the
court finds that the following criteria are met:

(1) Such person is not now and is not likely in the reasonable future to
commit another violent crime against another person because of such
person's mental illness; and

(2) Such person is aware of the nature of the violent crime committed
against another person and presently possesses the capacity to appreciate
the criminality of the violent crime against another person and the
capacity to conform such person's conduct to the requirements of law in
the future. (L. 1963 p. 674 § 4, A.L. 1969 p. 572, A.L. 1980 H.B. 1724,
A.L. 1985 S.B. 265, A.L. 1986 S.B. 618 & 562, A.L. 1991 H.B. 568, A.L.
1994 S.B. 763, A.L. 1996 S.B. 884 & 841, A.L. 1999 H.B. 327)

(1965) Petitioner confined in mental institution must resort to statutory
procedure for judicial review of his existing mental condition before
seeking federal habeas corpus. Cyronne DeVirgin v. State of Missouri, 341
F.2d 568.

(1974) Held, this section does not violate due process under 14th
amendment to U.S. Const. by failing to have a hearing on mental state of
defendant at time of commitment. State v. Kee (Mo.), 510 S.W.2d 477.

(1974) Held that court must be satisfied that applicant poses no danger
to himself or others and that cure of mental problem had at time of
commitment does not necessarily guarantee that another dangerous mental
problem does not exist. A psychiatrist opinion alone is not conclusive.
State v. Montague (A.), 510 S.W.2d 776.

(1977) Release under this section is solely on patient's mental condition
and potential dangerousness. The fact that the patient can be given no
further beneficial treatment does not of itself justify release. State v.
Davee (A.), 558 S.W.2d 335.

(1991) Although statute permitted person confined to Missouri state
hospital to reapply for release every one hundred eighty days, petitioner
was not required to reapply for release from state hospital continually
and appeal every denial in order to satisfy exhaustion requirements for
federal habeas corpus relief. Kolocotronis v. Holcomb, 925 F.2d 278 (8th
Cir.).

(1994) It is constitutionally permissible to place burden of proof on
insanity acquittee seeking release to prove that he or she is no longer
suffering from mental disease or defect rendering him or her dangerous to
the safety of self or others. Trial court erred in finding section
unconstitutional for placing the burden of persuasion upon the person
seeking release. Styles v. State, 877 S.W.2d 113 (Mo.banc).

All hearings held pursuant to the provisions of section 552.040
shall be open to the public. (L. 1994 S.B. 763)

1. Whenever the court commits to a state institution for
observation or detention the person afflicted with a mental disease or
defect under authority of this chapter, the court shall also order a
transcript of all, or any part, of the evidence or oral proceedings in
the case to be given to the institution and the expense to be paid as
authorized by section 485.100*, RSMo.

2. Whenever the court orders a person committed to a state institution
for observation or detention under this chapter, an appropriate
preliminary letter shall accompany the commitment order containing
sufficient information to enable the institution to detain properly and
to start preliminary evaluation of the committed person.

3. The preliminary letter shall include, if available, the following:

(1) A statement of the person's family and occupational status, past
delinquency and criminal records;

(2) A summary of the facts surrounding the alleged crime, including
reports of police investigation, if such document exists, a statement of
his behavior while under arrest; and

(3) An opinion as to whether he has a violent nature and what degree of
security detention seems appropriate. (L. 1965 p. 668)

(1973) Prosecuting attorney may write appropriate preliminary letter.
Barbarick v. State (Mo.), 496 S.W.2d 843.

*Transferred 2000; now 488.2250

1. If the chief administrative officer of any correctional
facility has reasonable cause to believe that any offender needs care in
a mental hospital, he shall so certify to the division of classification
and treatment, which shall then transfer the offender to a state mental
hospital for custody, care and treatment. The hospital may detain and
treat the offender for a period of time not to exceed ninety-six hours.
At the expiration of the ninety-six hours, the offender shall be returned
to a correctional facility designated by the department of corrections
unless the individual admits himself as a voluntary patient or the mental
health coordinator or head of the facility files for involuntary
detention and treatment pursuant to chapter 632, RSMo. The petition filed
pursuant to section 632.330, RSMo, shall be filed in the court having
probate jurisdiction over the mental health facility in which the
offender is being detained. The offender shall have the rights afforded
respondents in sections 632.330 and 632.335, RSMo, except that at the
conclusion of the hearing on the petition the court may order the
offender detained for a period of time not to exceed ninety days. At the
expiration of the ninety-day commitment period ordered by the court, the
offender may be detained and treated involuntarily for up to an
additional one year under sections 632.355 and 632.360, RSMo.

2. When an offender needs care in a mental hospital and is committed or
transferred to a state mental hospital, the time spent at the mental
hospital shall be calculated as a part of the sentence imposed upon him
whether the sentence is an indeterminate one or for a definite period of
time. The time spent at the mental hospital shall be deducted from the
term of the sentence.

3. When an offender who has been transferred from a correctional facility
to a state mental hospital recovers before the expiration of his
sentence, the superintendent of the hospital shall so certify in writing
to the division of classification and treatment. He shall thereupon be
transferred to such correctional facility as the department may direct.

4. An offender who has been committed to or transferred to a state mental
hospital and is still mentally ill at the expiration of his sentence may
be discharged and delivered to any person who is able and willing to
maintain him comfortably and to the satisfaction of the superintendent of
the hospital, if, in the opinion of the superintendent, it is reasonably
safe for the person to be at large. Before discharging the offender the
superintendent shall receive verification of the expiration of the
offender's sentence from the director of corrections. The person so
discharged may, in the discretion of the superintendent, be provided with
the whole or a portion of the allowances granted to discharged prisoners
by section 217.285, RSMo. The cost of such allowance shall be paid from
the same funds as are allowances granted to persons discharged directly
from a correctional facility.

5. When the term of an offender who has been committed or transferred to
a state mental hospital has expired and the person, in the opinion of the
hospital superintendent, is still in need of care in a mental hospital
and for the welfare and safety of himself and others should remain in the
hospital for custody, care and treatment, he shall be retained in the
hospital only if proper involuntary detention proceedings have been
instituted and held as provided in chapter 632, RSMo. Thereafter this
chapter and no other shall be applicable to his continued hospitalization
and discharge. (L. 1963 p. 674 § 5, A.L. 1971 S.B. 171, A.L. 1980 H.B.
1724, A.L. 1983 H.B. 713 Revision, A.L. 1990 H.B. 974)

1. No person condemned to death shall be executed if as a result
of mental disease or defect he lacks capacity to understand the nature
and purpose of the punishment about to be imposed upon him or matters in
extenuation, arguments for executive clemency or reasons why the sentence
should not be carried out.

2. If the director of the department of corrections has reasonable cause
to believe that any inmate then in confinement in a correctional facility
and sentenced to death has a mental disease or defect excluding fitness
for execution, he shall immediately notify the governor who shall
forthwith order a stay of execution of the sentence if there is not
sufficient time between such notification and time of execution for a
determination of the mental condition of such person to be made in
accordance with the provisions of this section without such stay. The
director shall also, as soon as reasonably possible, notify the director
of the department of mental health and the prosecuting or circuit
attorney of the county where the defendant was tried, the attorney
general and the circuit court of the county where the correctional
facility is located.

3. As soon as reasonably possible, after the notification prescribed in
subsection 2 of this section, the circuit court of the county shall
conduct an inquiry into the mental condition of the offender after first
granting any of the parties entitled to notification an examination by a
physician of their own choosing on proper application made within five
days of such notification.

4. If the court, after such inquiry, certifies to the governor and to the
director that the prisoner does not have a mental disease or defect of
the type referred to in subsection 1 of this section, the governor shall
fix a new date for the execution, if a stay of execution had previously
been made, and shall issue a warrant for the new execution date to the
chief administrative officer of the correctional facility, who shall then
proceed with the execution as ordered. If the court, after such inquiry,
certifies to the governor and to the director that the prisoner has a
mental disease or defect of the type referred to in subsection 1 of this
section, the offender shall not be executed but shall be held in the
correctional facility subject to transfer to a mental hospital and
further proceedings under section 552.050 if the provisions of section
552.050 are applicable. If any offender who has not been executed because
of any certification by the director as herein provided is thereafter
certified by the director as free of a mental disease or defect of the
type referred to in subsection 1 of this section, the governor shall fix
a new date for the execution and shall issue a warrant for the new
execution date to the chief administrative officer of the correctional
facility, who shall then take charge and custody of the offender and
proceed with the execution as ordered in the warrant.

5. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit the governor or
any court in the exercise of any of their powers in any other manner
under the law or Constitution of Missouri. (L. 1963 p. 674 § 6, A.L. 1989
H.B. 408)

In the exercise of his powers under article IV, section 7 of the
constitution of Missouri to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons
after conviction, the governor may, in his discretion, appoint a board of
inquiry whose duty it shall be to gather information, whether or not
admissible in a court of law, bearing upon whether or not a person
condemned to death should be executed or reprieved or pardoned, or
whether the person's sentence should be commuted. It is the duty of all
persons and institutions to give information and assistance to the board,
members of which shall serve without remuneration. Such board shall make
its report and recommendations to the governor. All information gathered
by the board shall be received and held by it and the governor in strict
confidence. (L. 1963 p. 674 § 7)

(2000) Appointment of board of inquiry is within the Governor's sole
discretion; an inmate has no due process right to such an appointment.
Roll v. Carnahan, 225 F.3d 1016 (8th Cir.).

1. Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, the court in
which the proceedings are pending shall, upon application and approval,
order the payment of or tax as costs the following expenses and fees,
which in each case shall be reasonable, and so found by the court:

(1) Expenses and fees for examinations, reports and expert testimony of
private psychiatrists who are neither employees nor contractors of the
department of mental health for purposes of performing such services and
who are appointed by the court to examine the accused under sections
552.020 and 552.030;

(2) The expenses of conveying any prisoner from a jail to a facility of
the department of mental health and the expense of returning him to a
jail under the provisions of section 552.020, 552.030, 552.040 or
552.050. Such expenses and fees shall be paid, no matter how taxed as
costs or collected, by the state, county or defendant, when liable for
such costs under the provisions of chapter 550, RSMo. Such order may be
made at any time before or after the final disposition of the case and
whether or not the accused is convicted or sentenced to the custody of
the division of corrections or county jail, as the case may be, or placed
upon probation or granted parole.

2. The expenses and fees provided in subsection 1 of this section may be
levied and collected under execution; except that, if the state or county
has by inadvertence or mistake paid expenses or fees as provided in
subsection 1 of this section, the political entity having made such a
mistake or inadvertent payment shall be entitled to recover the same from
the entity responsible for such payment.

3. If a person is ordered held or hospitalized by the director of the
department of mental health or in one of the facilities of the department
of mental health pursuant to the following provisions, the liability for
hospitalization shall be paid by the person, his estate or those
responsible for his support in accordance with chapter 630, RSMo:

(1) Following determination of lack of mental fitness to proceed under
subsection 7 of section 552.020;

(2) Following acquittal because of lack of responsibility due to mental
disease or defect under section 552.030, and subsequent order of
commitment to the director of the department of mental health under
section 552.040.

4. The method of collecting the costs and expenses herein provided or
otherwise incurred in connection with the custody, examination, trial,
transportation or treatment of any person accused or convicted of any
offense shall not be exclusive and same may be collected in any other
manner provided by law. (L. 1963 p. 674 § 8, A.L. 1969 p. 572, A.L. 1971
S.B. 163, A.L. 1980 H.B. 1724)

(1975) This section not unconstitutional as a grant or gift in violation
of art. III, § 38(a), constitution of Missouri. Robb v. Estate of Brown
(A.), 158 S.W.2d 729.

Usa-missouri Law Firm / Lawyers Services Provided in Usa-missouri :

Usa-missouri Divorce Laws, custody, Usa-missouri Corporate Lawyers, Agreement, provident fund, Registered marriage, Court marriage Lawyers, Special/ Foreign marriage, Incorporation of company, Rent, eviction, tenancy, Lease Lawyers, Usa-missouri Labour laws, Appeals, Supreme Court Lawyers, High Court Lawyers, Bail, medical, negligence, Insurance claims/ accidents Lawyer, Usa-missouri Citizenship/ immigration Lawyers, Copyright Laws, Consumer, district Lawyer, State, national, Dowry, Wills & Probate, Trust & Estates Lawyers, Intellectual Property Lawyer, Bankrupt Lawyers, Banking & Finance, Corporate, Private Business Law, Recovery, Joint Venture & Mergers, Consumer, Civil Right Law Usa-missouri, Medical Negligence, Medical Malpractice, legal notice, summons, Income Tax Lawyers, sales, Custom Law, Excise Law, octroi, cess Civil, Criminal Solicitor Usa-missouri, Registration of property, Title search, mutation relationship, Conveyance, Transfer of Property Law, Usa-missouri Property lawyer, deeds, drafts, power of attorney, Recovery, Taxation Laws in Usa-missouri

LEGAL SERVICES

Add Lawyer
Legal Enquiry
Find a Lawyer
Bare Acts / India Codes
Statutes / Code

LAWYER BY LOCATION

India Lawyer
United State Lawyer
UAE Lawyer
Canada Lawyer
Find More...

LAW PRACTICE AREA

Business Law
Employment & Labor Law
Govt. Agencis & Taxtion
Family Law
Real Estate Property Law
Immigration Law

ABOUT HELPLINELAW

About Us
Contact Us
Services
Site Map
Recommend to Friends

This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Persons accessing this site are encouraged to seek independent counsel for advice in India abroad regarding their individual legal, civil criminal issues or consult one of the experts online.