State v. Westbrook

Arizona Supreme Court

State v. Westbrook

417 P.2d 530, 101 Ariz. 206, 1966 Ariz. LEXIS 303

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 29, 1966

Docket1385

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 417 P.2d 530 (State v. Westbrook) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Westbrook, 417 P.2d 530, 101 Ariz. 206, 1966 Ariz. LEXIS 303 (Ark. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of conviction in this cause having heretofore been affirmed, State v. Westbrook, 99 Ariz. 30, 406 P.2d 388, and subsequently reversed in-the Supreme Court of the United States, 384 U.S. 150, 86 S.Ct. 1320, 16 L.Ed.2d 429, and remanded to this Court for proceedings consistent with the opinion therein, it is therefore ordered that the Superior Court of Maricopa County cause, three disinterested psychiatrists to-examine the defendant Thomas A. West-brook pursuant to Rule 250, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S., and after hearing determine:

(1) Whether defendant is insane or mentally defective to the extent that he is unable to understand the proceedings against him,

(2) Whether defendant is insane or mentally defective so as to be unable to-assist in his defense, and

(3) Whether defendant is insane or mentally defective to the extent that he is unable to intelligently and competently waive his constitutional right to the assistance of counsel and conduct his own defense.

If the defendant is sane and not mentally defective in any of the foregoing particulars, the superior court shall proceed to a retrial on the charge set forth in the information. If the defendant is insane or mentally defective in any of the foregoing particulars, he shall be committed to the Arizona State Hospital at Phoenix, Arizona, *207 there to remain until such time as he is sane and not mentally defective in any of the foregoing particulars and thereafter he shall be retried on the charge set forth in the information.

It is ordered that W. Edward Morgan, attorney as law, is hereby appointed as counsel for the defendant with directions to act for and on his behalf in all proceedings in this cause and until such time as he is relieved by further order of this Court.

NOTE: Justice LORNA E. LOCKWOOD did not participate in the determination of this decision.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of conviction in this cause having heretofore been affirmed, State v. Westbrook, 99 Ariz. 30, 406 P.2d 388, and subsequently reversed in-the Supreme Court of the United States, 384 U.S. 150, 86 S.Ct. 1320, 16 L.Ed.2d 429, and remanded to this Court for proceedings consistent with the opinion therein, it is therefore ordered that the Superior Court of Maricopa County cause, three disinterested psychiatrists to-examine the defendant Thomas A. West-brook pursuant to Rule 250, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S., and after hearing determine:

(1) Whether defendant is insane or mentally defective to the extent that he is unable to understand the proceedings against him,

(2) Whether defendant is insane or mentally defective so as to be unable to-assist in his defense, and

(3) Whether defendant is insane or mentally defective to the extent that he is unable to intelligently and competently waive his constitutional right to the assistance of counsel and conduct his own defense.

If the defendant is sane and not mentally defective in any of the foregoing particulars, the superior court shall proceed to a retrial on the charge set forth in the information. If the defendant is insane or mentally defective in any of the foregoing particulars, he shall be committed to the Arizona State Hospital at Phoenix, Arizona, *207 there to remain until such time as he is sane and not mentally defective in any of the foregoing particulars and thereafter he shall be retried on the charge set forth in the information.

It is ordered that W. Edward Morgan, attorney as law, is hereby appointed as counsel for the defendant with directions to act for and on his behalf in all proceedings in this cause and until such time as he is relieved by further order of this Court.

NOTE: Justice LORNA E. LOCKWOOD did not participate in the determination of this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

417 P.2d 530, 101 Ariz. 206, 1966 Ariz. LEXIS 303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-westbrook-ariz-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack