Skip to Content

Dr. David Lombard

Parenting Plan Evaluations

Parenting Time Evaluations

Competency & Sanity Evaluations

Dr. David Lombard

Parenting Plan Evaluations

Parenting Time Evaluations

Competency & Sanity Evaluations

Folder: Areas of Pactice

Parenting Plan Evaluations

Parenting Time Evaluations

Competency & Sanity Evaluations

Competency and Sanity Evaluations for Adults and Juveniles

Independent forensic evaluations that give Indiana criminal and juvenile courts clear, well-supported answers to difficult legal questions.

When a person's mental condition may affect their ability to face charges, or their responsibility for what they did, the court needs more than an opinion. It needs a careful, impartial evaluation grounded in the legal standard, the evidence, and sound clinical method.

Dr. David Lombard, PhD, is a licensed Indiana psychologist with more than 30 years of clinical and forensic experience. He conducts competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility (sanity) evaluations for Indiana courts, for both adults and juveniles.

Fairness to the person accused is part of justice, as is fairness to victims and the community. Dr. Lombard approaches every evaluation with that conviction: every person deserves to be seen accurately and treated with dignity, and every court deserves the truth as clearly as it can be told.

Competency to Stand Trial (Adults)

Indiana law requires a hearing when, at any point before a case is submitted for decision, the court has reasonable grounds to believe a defendant lacks the ability to understand the proceedings and assist in the preparation of a defense (IC 35-36-3-1). The standard reflects the constitutional principle set out in Dusky v. United States (1960): a defendant must have a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings and a sufficient present ability to consult with counsel.

For murder and Level 1 through Level 5 felonies, the court appoints two or three evaluators. For misdemeanors and Level 6 felonies, the court appoints one. Each appointed psychologist must be endorsed by the Indiana State Board of Examiners in Psychology as a health service provider in psychology (HSPP).

A competency evaluation addresses the defendant's present functioning, including:

Understanding of the charges, possible penalties, and the roles of the judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney.
Ability to communicate with counsel, weigh options such as a plea offer, and make reasoned decisions.
Ability to follow testimony and behave appropriately in the courtroom.
Any mental illness, intellectual disability, or other condition affecting those abilities.
When a defendant is found not competent, whether restoration appears likely and what would support it.

Juvenile Competency

Since December 31, 2022, Indiana has had a dedicated juvenile competency statute (IC 31-37-26), which filled a gap the Indiana Supreme Court identified in In re K.G. (2004) when it held that the adult competency statute does not apply in delinquency cases (Indiana Court Times).

Under the juvenile statute, the court appoints one disinterested evaluator, or two if a party requests a second. The evaluator must be a psychiatrist or HSPP-endorsed psychologist with expertise in juvenile competency. Several protections are built in:

The evaluation takes place in the least restrictive setting consistent with the case, as close to the child's home as practicable.
Statements a child makes during the evaluation or hearing may not be used against the child in any juvenile or adult proceeding.
If a child is found not competent, the court determines whether competency can be attained within 180 days for felony-level allegations or 90 days for other allegations.

Young people are not simply smaller adults. A juvenile competency evaluation pays particular attention to developmental maturity, including a child's grasp of abstract legal concepts, susceptibility to adult influence, and ability to consider long-term consequences, alongside any mental health or intellectual concerns.

Criminal Responsibility (Sanity) Evaluations

Competency looks at the present. Criminal responsibility looks back to the time of the offense. Under Indiana law, a person is not responsible for prohibited conduct if, as a result of mental disease or defect, the person was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct at the time of the offense (IC 35-41-3-6). The statute defines mental disease or defect as a severely abnormal mental condition that grossly and demonstrably impairs perception, and it excludes abnormalities shown only by repeated unlawful or antisocial conduct.

When the defense is raised, the court appoints two or three disinterested psychiatrists, psychologists, or physicians with expertise in determining insanity to examine the defendant and testify at trial (IC 35-36-2-2). Indiana courts treat expert opinions as advisory; the judge or jury makes the final determination.

A criminal responsibility evaluation reconstructs the defendant's mental state at the time of the alleged offense, using the defendant's account, witness statements, police reports and recordings, prior treatment records, and psychological testing. The opinion addresses both parts of the legal test: whether a qualifying mental disease or defect was present, and whether it left the person unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct. These evaluations are conducted for adults and for youth whose cases proceed in adult criminal court.

The Evaluation Process

Order of appointment. The court order defines the legal question, whether competency, criminal responsibility, or both, and provides access to the records needed.
Records review. Charging documents, police reports and recordings, jail or detention records, school records for juveniles, and prior mental health and medical records are reviewed before the interview.
Notice of purpose. The defendant is told who ordered the evaluation, that it is not treatment or confidential, and who will receive the report. For juveniles, this is explained in age-appropriate language.
Clinical and forensic interview. Conducted in jail, detention, the office, or another appropriate setting, with the depth the legal question requires.
Psychological testing, where indicated. Standardized measures of competency-related abilities, cognitive functioning, psychiatric symptoms, and response style help ensure findings reflect genuine impairment rather than exaggeration or minimization.
Collateral information. Family members, treatment providers, jail staff, or others may be contacted when their observations bear on the question.
Written report. The report states the legal question, the data relied upon, the clinical findings, and a clearly reasoned opinion tied to the Indiana standard.
Testimony. Dr. Lombard testifies at competency hearings and at trial as required.

Standards and Neutrality

Every evaluation follows the APA Ethics Code and the APA Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology, which call for impartiality, informed notice to the person evaluated, reliance on multiple sources of data, and clear separation of forensic and treatment roles.

Indiana law requires court-appointed evaluators to be disinterested. Dr. Lombard's opinions are the same whichever side benefits from them. He does not provide treatment, counseling, or pastoral care to anyone he evaluates, and he does not evaluate anyone he has previously treated.

For Judges, Prosecutors, and Defense Counsel

Dr. Lombard accepts court appointments for adult competency, juvenile competency, and criminal responsibility evaluations in all Indiana counties, with a particular focus on northeast Indiana. Court staff and counsel are welcome to contact the office to:

Confirm availability and current turnaround times.
Request Dr. Lombard's CV.
Discuss the records an evaluator will need and how to transmit them securely.
Arrange evaluations in jail, detention, or other secure settings.

Request an Evaluation → Contact Us

Justice depends on seeing people clearly. Careful evaluation is one way to honor both the law and the person standing before it.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between competency and sanity? Competency concerns the defendant's present ability to understand the case and work with counsel. Sanity, or criminal responsibility, concerns the defendant's mental state at the time of the alleged offense. A person can be competent now yet not have been responsible then, or the reverse.

Does a mental health diagnosis mean a person is incompetent or insane? No. Many people with serious mental illness are competent to stand trial. Indiana's insanity standard also requires more than a diagnosis: the condition must have left the person unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct.

Is what the defendant says during the evaluation confidential? No. The evaluation is conducted for the court, and the defendant is told this at the start. For juveniles, Indiana law provides that statements made during a competency evaluation may not be used against the child in any juvenile or adult proceeding.

What happens if a defendant is found not competent? Proceedings are paused while restoration services are provided, and the court periodically reviews whether competency has been attained. For juveniles, the statute sets specific timeframes of 180 days for felony-level allegations and 90 days for other allegations.

How long does an evaluation take? Turnaround depends on the question, the records, and access to the defendant. Current timeframes are 20 to 30 days from receipt of the order and records.

Can defense counsel retain Dr. Lombard privately? No. Currently, evaluations are accepted only through court appointments.

References

Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960). Justia
Indiana Code 35-36-3-1 (comprehension to stand trial). Justia
Indiana Code 31-37-26 (juvenile competency, effective December 31, 2022). Justia
Indiana Code 35-41-3-6 (mental disease or defect). Justia
Indiana Code 35-36-2 (insanity defense procedure). Justia
Indiana Office of Court Services. (2021). New juvenile competency provisions. Indiana Court Times. times.courts.in.gov
American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. apa.org/ethics/code
American Psychological Association. (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. apa.org/practice/guidelines/forensic-psychology

Dr. David Lombard

3262 Mallard Cove Lane
Fort Wayne, Indiana 46804

David@DavidLombard.com
(260) 459-2900