Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • AAPL

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
  • AAPL
  • Alerts
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
Research ArticleRegular Article

Connecticut's Experience with Sell Legislation

Michael A. Norko, Mark S. Cotterell and Tamika Hollis
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online July 2020, JAAPL.200005-20; DOI: https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.200005-20
Michael A. Norko
Dr. Norko is Professor, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and Director of Forensic Services for the Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction, Services, Hartford, Connecticut. Dr. Cotterell is Instructor in Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College and Medical Director of the Forensic Program, New Hampshire Hospital, Concord, New Hampshire. Ms. Hollis is a Research Associate, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
MD, MAR
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark S. Cotterell
Dr. Norko is Professor, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and Director of Forensic Services for the Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction, Services, Hartford, Connecticut. Dr. Cotterell is Instructor in Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College and Medical Director of the Forensic Program, New Hampshire Hospital, Concord, New Hampshire. Ms. Hollis is a Research Associate, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tamika Hollis
Dr. Norko is Professor, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and Director of Forensic Services for the Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction, Services, Hartford, Connecticut. Dr. Cotterell is Instructor in Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College and Medical Director of the Forensic Program, New Hampshire Hospital, Concord, New Hampshire. Ms. Hollis is a Research Associate, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
MBA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Special limited conservator and health care guardian petitions and restoration of competency to stand trial. SLC, special limited conservator; HCG, Health Care Guardian; LOS, length of stay.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Sell Factors and Garcia Factorsa

    Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003)16State v. Garcia, 658 A.2d 947 (Conn. 1995)12,b
    1. Important government interests at stake5. Seriousness of alleged crime such that state’s interest overrides defendant’s interests
    2a. Involuntary medication will significantly further those interests1. Involuntary medication will render the defendant competent
    2b. Side effects will not interfere with defendant’s ability to assist counsel3. Proposed treatment plan narrowly tailored to minimize intrusion on defendant’s liberty and privacy interests (but no specific statement regarding side effects at trial)
    3. Involuntary medication necessary to further government interests and alternative, less intrusive treatments are unlikely to achieve substantially similar results2. Adjudication not possible with less intrusive means
    4. Medication is medically appropriate (in defendant’s best medical interest)3. Proposed treatment plan narrowly tailored (as above), and
    4. Proposed medication will not cause unreasonable risk to defendant’s health
    Other: Health Care Guardian to advise court regarding best medical interest if defendant is incapable of informed consent
    • ↵a Numbered in accordance with the text of court decisions.

    • ↵b Health care guardian/criminal court procedures.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Procedures in Connecticut for Involuntary Medication

    Civil Procedures for Medication-Refusing Patients (§ 17a-543)Post-Sell Civil Procedures for Incompetent Medication-Refusing Criminal Defendants (§ 17a-543a)a
    Applies to patients admitted under most statutesApplies only to patients admitted after finding of not competent to stand trial
    Incapable of giving informed consent to medication for treatment of psychiatric disabilitiesIncapable of giving informed consent to medication for treatment of psychiatric disabilities
    Such medication is necessary for patient’s treatmentSuch medication is necessary for patient’s treatment
    Probate court finding by clear and convincing evidenceProbate court finding by clear and convincing evidence
    Appointment of conservator with authority to give or withhold consent for 120 days, renewable; authority expires upon discharge from hospitalAppointment of Special Limited Conservator with authority to give or withhold consent for 120 days, renewable; authority expires upon discharge from hospital or resolution of competence matter in criminal court
    Conservator meets with patient and physician and reviews medical record; considers risks and benefits of medication, likelihood and seriousness of adverse side effects, preferences of the patient, patient’s religious views, and prognosis with and without medicationSpecial Limited Conservator meets with patient and physician and reviews medical record; considers risks and benefits of medication, likelihood and seriousness of adverse side effects, the preferences of the patient, and prognosis with and without medication
    Alternative “internal procedure” available for in-hospital hearing with decision rendered by hearing officer not employed by facility in which the patient is admitted (involuntary medication may be authorized for 30 days via this procedure)Only probate court procedure available
    • ↵a Special limited conservator/probate court procedures.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    CSTR Admissions and SLC Petitions

    Total CSTR Admissions, nSLC Petitions, n (%)HCG Petitions, n (%)
    200523627 (11.4)0
    200621621 (9.7)1 (0.5)
    200720327 (13.3)0
    200822929 (12.7)3 (1.3)
    200919018 (9.5)0
    201020426 (12.7)0
    201117729 (16.4)1 (0.6)
    Total1,455177 (12.2)5 (0.3)
    • CSTR, competence to stand trial restoration; SLC, special limited conservator; HCG, health care guardian

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Demographic Information of Special Limited Conservator Study Group

    CharacteristicProportion, %
    Gender
        Male74.7
        Female25.3
    Race/ethnicity
        White58
        Black34
        Hispanic/Latino8
    Age distribution
        40–5952
        20–3941
        >607
    Marital Status
        Never married69.7
        Divorced20.8
        Legally separated3.9
        Married3.9
        Widowed1.7
    Veteran status6.7
    • View popup
    Table 5

    Median Number of Days from Admission to Competence to Stand Trial Disposition

    Cases (n)All SLC Applications (177)Granted SLC Applications (160)Granted SLC Restored (118)Granted SLC Not Restored (42)Denied SLC Applications (16)
    Daysa140139123194159
    • ↵a Median days are rounded to whole numbers.

    • SLC, special limited conservator.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Timetable for Stages of Involuntary Medication Proceedingsa

    Row LabelSubgroupCases, nbAdmission to ProbateProbate to DispositionAdmission to DispositionAdmission to HCG HearingProbate to HCG HearingHCG Hearing to DispositionFirst to Second Probate Hearing
    AAll SLC applications1774384140
    BSLC granted1604384139
    CSLC denied164486159
    DWithdrawal184957
    ESLC restored1183977123
    FSLC granted, not restored4249137194
    GApplied HCG645144209
    HApplied HCG, granted33618622214810185
    IApplied HCG, granted, restored23626430020917391
    JApplied HCG, granted, not restored1881011891486041
    KApplied HCG, denied213972212
    LApplied HCG, no decision153164218
    MDid not apply HCG104444106
    NSecond SLC application, restored24472116116
    ONo second SLC application8364487
    PNo second SLC application, restored7334172
    QNo second SLC application, not restored1122158280
    • ↵a Timetable given in median days rounded to whole numbers.

    • ↵b For subgroups with two members, mean values are noted. For subgroups with one member, the values for the individual are noted.

    • HCG, health care guardian; SLC, special limited conservator.

Next
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 53 (1)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 53, Issue 1
1 Mar 2025
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Connecticut's Experience with Sell Legislation
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Connecticut's Experience with Sell Legislation
Michael A. Norko, Mark S. Cotterell, Tamika Hollis
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Jul 2020, JAAPL.200005-20; DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.200005-20

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Connecticut's Experience with Sell Legislation
Michael A. Norko, Mark S. Cotterell, Tamika Hollis
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Jul 2020, JAAPL.200005-20; DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.200005-20
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • A Forensic Science-Based Model for Identifying and Mitigating Forensic Mental Health Expert Biases
  • Bias in Peer Review of Forensic Psychiatry Publications
  • Reconsidering the Relationship Between Criminal Insanity and Delusions
Show more Regular Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • competency restoration
  • involuntary medication
  • Sell v. United States
  • probate court
  • Connecticut General Statutes
  • length of stay

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Information for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts

Other Resources

  • Academy Website
  • AAPL Meetings
  • AAPL Annual Review Course

Reviewers

  • Peer Reviewers

Other Publications

  • AAPL Practice Guidelines
  • AAPL Newsletter
  • AAPL Ethics Guidelines
  • AAPL Amicus Briefs
  • Landmark Cases

Customer Service

  • Cookie Policy
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Order Physical Copy

Copyright © 2025 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law