STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA            IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

COUNTY OF UNION                                SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION

                                                      FILE NOS.:

 

 

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA            )

                                                      )        MOTION FOR FORENSIC

vs.                                                   )        EVALUATION OF

                                                      )        MENTAL CAPACITY

MICHAEL RODNEY MCKEE,               )       

                                         Defendant  )

 

     NOW COMES THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, by and through the undersigned Assistant District Attorney, and moves this Court to Order that the above named Defendant receive a forensic evaluation to assess the Defendant’s then existing state of mind at the time of the commission of the offense for which he has been charged pursuant to State v. Huff, 325 N.C. 1, 381 S.E.2d 635 (1989), sentence vacated on other grounds, 497 U.S. 1021, 111 L. Ed. 2d 777, 110 S. Ct. 3266 (1990). In support of this Motion, the State shows the Court the following:

 

1.     [defendant’s name and charges];and,

 

2.     Counsel for the Defendant has previously moved the Court for an order awarding funds for a psychologist to evaluate the defendant’s ability to form the specific intent to commit the offenses with which he is charged; and,

 

3.     The Court has granted the Defendant’s motion; and,

 

4.     Based upon the defense expert’s opinion, counsel for the Defendant has served a Notice of Affirmative Defense with the State; and,

 

5.     In Huff, supra at 44, the North Carolina Supreme Court has ruled that the State is entitled, in the interests of balance and fairness, to an independent evaluation of a defendant when the defendant is using a mental health defense.  In Huff, the ruling allowed the State a second evaluation once the defendant’s psychologist completed his evaluation.  Id. at 46.

 

6.     The State has not received any evaluation from the Defendant’s expert; and,

 

7.     The State is in need of an independent evaluation of the Defendant to rebut any expert testimony offered by the Defendant’s psychologist

 

WHEREFORE, the State prays the Court to Order:

 

1.     That the Defendant be committed to Dorothea Dix Hospital for a forensic evaluation to determine the following:

a.     At the time of the offense, did the Defendant have the ability to recognize right from wrong?

 

b.    At the time of the offense, did the Defendant suffer from any recognized mental illness, defect or disorder, or suffer from any mental or emotional disturbance?

 

c.     At the time of the offense, did the Defendant have the ability to plan his actions?

 

d.    At the time of the offense, did the Defendant have the ability to premeditate and deliberate?

 

e.     At the time of the offense, did the Defendant act in the heat of passion?

 

f.      At the time of the offense, was the Defendant capable of forming the specific intent to kill the victim?

 

g.    At the time of the offense, was the Defendant capable of acting with malice?

 

h.    At the time of the offense, was the Defendant acting consciously?

 

i.      Whether any other test or evaluation could be conducted to determine the Defendant’s mental capacity or illness.

 

2.  For any other relief the Court deems just and proper.

 

 

This the ____ day of __________________, 200__.

 

                                            

                                             ___________________________

                                                               Timothy R. Rodgers

                                                               Assistant District Attorney

                                                               20^th Prosecutorial District

                                                               P.O. 1065

                                             Monroe, North Carolina 28111

                                             (704)-289-3340