Note:
Robert A. Major, Jr., Criminal Procedure—Insanity Defense—In Determining Whether to Raise the Defense of Insanity Sua Sponte over the Objection of a Certified Competent Defendant, the Trial Court Must Hear Evidence Supporting as Well as Opposing the Raising of the Defense and Must Articulate the Reasons Underlying Its Ultimate Determination: United States v. Robertson, 507 F.2d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 1974), 53 Texas L. Rev. 1065 (1975).
 

Abstract:
Accused of an apparently motiveless murder, Thomas Robertson was certified mentally competent to stand trial by the District Court for the District of Columbia. Subsequent to the jury conviction, the court held a hearing to consider whether it should raise the insanity defense sua sponte, an action Robertson opposed as impugning the social protest of his act. In accordance with that opposition, defense counsel called no witnesses. The court determined not to raise the defense and sentenced Robertson. After an apparent change of heart, Robertson appealed, claiming error in the court’s decision not to raise the defense. Reversed and remanded. In a hearing to determine whether to raise the insanity defense sua sponte, the trial court must fully explore the evidence that raises the issue and declare reasons for its decision.