The importance of considering mental health during criminal sentencing
Presentation Type
Abstract
Faculty Advisor
Thomas Loikith
Access Type
Event
Start Date
25-4-2025 12:00 PM
End Date
25-4-2025 1:00 PM
Description
Many persons charged with offenses present evidence that their actions were the result of underlying mental illness. Individuals suffering from mental illness often do not possess the same understanding of right from wrong as persons who are not mentally ill. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide that mental health can be relevant in sentencing decisions. However, in 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the Guidelines were only advisory in nature. Studies have shown that the major factor used in determining sentences has been a defendant’s prior criminal record irrespective of a defendant’s mental health. What can be done to require that federal courts give appropriate consideration to the mental health of a defendant when determining sentences? This is a complex problem requiring interdisciplinary research to arrive at a more comprehensive understanding. From September 2025 through March 2025, using qualitative research methodology, I analyzed sources from the disciplines of law and psychology. Those sources included the Constitution, federal statutes, Supreme Court opinions, and relevant articles from scholarly journals. I identified conflicting insights from each discipline and found common ground between them. Through integration of the insights, I achieved a more comprehensive understanding of the problem leading to suggested solutions. I conclude that fundamental fairness and due process of law require that the mental health of a defendant be considered in determining a sentence. Reforming federal sentencing guidelines and enacting appropriate legislation is necessary so that the mental health of a defendant is required to be taken into account in a sentencing decision.
The importance of considering mental health during criminal sentencing
Many persons charged with offenses present evidence that their actions were the result of underlying mental illness. Individuals suffering from mental illness often do not possess the same understanding of right from wrong as persons who are not mentally ill. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide that mental health can be relevant in sentencing decisions. However, in 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the Guidelines were only advisory in nature. Studies have shown that the major factor used in determining sentences has been a defendant’s prior criminal record irrespective of a defendant’s mental health. What can be done to require that federal courts give appropriate consideration to the mental health of a defendant when determining sentences? This is a complex problem requiring interdisciplinary research to arrive at a more comprehensive understanding. From September 2025 through March 2025, using qualitative research methodology, I analyzed sources from the disciplines of law and psychology. Those sources included the Constitution, federal statutes, Supreme Court opinions, and relevant articles from scholarly journals. I identified conflicting insights from each discipline and found common ground between them. Through integration of the insights, I achieved a more comprehensive understanding of the problem leading to suggested solutions. I conclude that fundamental fairness and due process of law require that the mental health of a defendant be considered in determining a sentence. Reforming federal sentencing guidelines and enacting appropriate legislation is necessary so that the mental health of a defendant is required to be taken into account in a sentencing decision.
Comments
Poster presentation at the 2025 Student Research Symposium.