The State of Arkansas is now seeking a mental evaluation of a Nevada County man on death row against whom it has argued for more than 10 years that he is not mentally retarded.
On the heels of an extraordinary prison site hearing conducted by U.S. District Judge Harry F. Barnes earlier this month, the state now contends that it wants its own independent mental evaluation of Joe Louis Dansby, 58, of rural Nevada County, conducted by federal doctors at the Springfield Medical Center in Springfield, Mo.
In a filing before Barnes on March 22, state's attorneys argue that Dansby has been uncooperative with the independent mental evaluation sought by his attorneys, and that Dansby's conduct during the March 18 hearing before Barnes demonstrated that lack of cooperation.
“Dansby voluntarily appeared at the March 18, 2010, hearing at which time this Court advised him that he needed to cooperate with counsel and Dr. (George) Woods or it was likely that the Court would order him transported to the Federal Medical Facility in Springfield, Missouri for an evaluation,” Arkansas Assistant Attorney General Pamela Rumpz argues. “Dansby informed the Court that counsel did not represent him and that he would not cooperate with counsel or the expert chosen by counsel.”
Consequently, the state is asking that Dansby be examined to determine his mental fitness to cooperate with his defense, to understand the nature of the proceedings in his behalf, to understand that he is subject to the death penalty for his 1997 conviction in the murders of a Nevada County couple, and to determine his IQ and whether he is mentally retarded as defined by statute.
The state is arguing from a point of expedience, according to a note to Rumpz's filing.
“By making this request, Respondent's only interest is in moving the case toward resolution,” the state argued. “Respondent is in no way conceding that there is a right to be competent in habeas corpus proceedings and incorporates by reference his earlier argument that no such right exists.”
Rumpz argues the point specifically that mental retardation now is at issue, whether it was raised originally or not.
“Plainly then Dansby has asserted his mental condition entitles him to relief from his sentence; thus, there can be no question that the condition sought to be examined – his alleged mental retardation and incompetence – is really and genuinely in controversy,” the state argues. “That controversy, coupled with Dansby's refusal to cooperate with counsel's retained expert, establishes good cause so as to require him to submit to an evaluation by an expert chosen by the Court.”
