House adopts narrow 'special mitigation' for mentally ill offenders after floor debate

The Utah House on Feb. 4 approved Senate Bill 20, which creates a narrowly tailored "special mitigation" for defendants who were delusional at the time they committed an offense.

Sponsor Representative Cox told colleagues the measure does not expand the insanity defense but allows a one-degree mitigation where a defendant’s delusion—if the delusional facts were true—would have legally justified the use of deadly force. "This bill originated within the Statewide Association of Prosecutors and it is promoted by the prosecution counsel," Cox said, adding the defense must prove the mitigation by a preponderance of the evidence.

Cox and members noted the bill preserves Utah’s strict mental-illness standards established in a 1983 statute and discussed the narrow circumstances the mitigation would cover. Cox said the change responds in part to concerns following the state supreme court’s decision in State v. Herrera and was written so that mentally ill defendants would still be found guilty but could have a reduced degree of punishment in very limited cases.

Representative Bigelow asked whether a nonunanimous finding on the mitigation would create a hung jury; Cox and counsel from the Attorney General’s Office explained that a hung jury on that issue would require a retrial. Other members questioned whether conditions such as depression could qualify; Cox said the mitigation would typically apply in situations involving profound delusion (for example, schizophrenia), and that the statute limits evaluation to the defendant’s mental state at the time of the incident.

The House passed the bill 47–21. The floor transcript shows the Judiciary Committee reported the bill favorably (6–0–5) before floor debate.