Milton Dusky Case Study

The roots of competency restoration began with the landmark legal case Dusky v United States (1960). Milton Dusky, a 33-year old white male, diagnosed with schizophrenia, was arrested for accessory to kidnapping, and rape of a juvenile female. Although he was suffering from symptoms of his schizophrenia at the time of the arrest and trial, and a testimony from a psychiatrist stated that he was “unable to properly understand the proceedings against him and unable to adequately assist counsel in his defense”, he was still found guilty, and convicted. His lawyers filed an appeal, saying that Dusky was not competent at the time of his conviction, and subsequently that the conviction be reversed. After reviewing the evidence, the court ruled
in favor of Dusky’s appeal, saying that in order to be competent to stand trial, the defendant must have a “sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.” These two prongs are now considered the Dusky standard. Dusky was retried, and his sentence was reduced. This case set a standard in mental illness regarding competence, such that the defendant has a right to a competency evaluation prior to their trial, and it laid the groundwork for the fundamental statues that we now know encompass competency.