FindLaw | Legal News & Information

In this week's episode, Marjorie Hallenbeck is found dead in a hospital solarium after being admitted for tests. According to the Medical Examiner, Mrs. Hallenbeck was punched twice in the torso and died from internal bleeding caused by a ruptured spleen and lack of immediate medical treatment. Mrs. Hallenbeck's husband suffers from Alzheimer's disease. The Hallenbecks have two adult children. The daughter, Lisa, is devoted to Mr. Hallenbeck and is his primary caretaker.

A police investigation quickly reveals that some of Mrs. Hallenbeck's valuable jewelry is missing. Lisa insists that she saw her mother wearing the jewelry just hours before she was killed. The police learn that, earlier that same evening, Mrs. Hallenbeck received a visit from Philip Greitz, a member of her support group for spouses of Alzheimer's patients. The police further learn that Greitz, who frequents support groups under numerous aliases, bilks money and valuables from wealthy, vulnerable women. The police find one of these women wearing Mrs. Hallenbeck's watch.

Greitz's arrest presents an interesting search issue. The police approach Greitz at an airline terminal, where he is about to board a plane with yet another older rich woman. Detective Green asks to search Greitz's bag. Greitz asks what would happen if he refused. Green says "pretty much the same thing," implying that the police could conduct the search anyway. Greitz then allows Green to search the bag. The bag contains Mrs. Hallenbeck's jewelry (minus the watch), and Greitz is arrested for her murder. However, the prosecution could not use the jewelry as evidence against Greitz, for the search violated Greitz's Fourth Amendment rights. The police needed a warrant or Greitz's consent to search the bag. Greitz's consent to the search was defective because the police led him to believe that he had no right to refuse the request to search.

At first, Greitz refuses to tell the prosecution his real name, and a fingerprint check reveals no prior criminal record. At that point, the court postpones Greitz's arraignment until the police determine his identity. This would never happen. As long as the police have his fingerprints, Greitz can be arraigned as "John Doe" or under another fictional name.

The murder charge against Greitz quickly evaporates. Greitz claims that Mrs. Hallenbeck gave him the jewelry for safekeeping because her husband had Alzheimer's, her son had no time for her, and her daughter was greedy. A nurse confirms that Mrs. Hallenbeck was not wearing her jewelry just before Lisa and her father visited on the night of the murder. The police can find no evidence that Greitz had ever physically harmed anyone before. They learn that Mrs. Hallenbeck had life insurance and that Lisa was often angry with her mother but attentive to her father. When the police question her, Lisa states that she hit her mother but didn't mean to kill her.

In an authentic touch, the Medical Examiner quickly discredits Lisa's confession. A square imprint in the center of a bruise on Mrs. Hallenbeck's body means that whoever punched her wore a square ring, a little over a half an inch in size. On a hunch, the police visit Mr. Hallenbeck. They ask his son to have his father take his hands out of his pockets, a request that doesn't violate Mr. Hallenbeck's Fourth Amendment rights because he has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his hands. We see that Mr. Hallenbeck wears a ring with a flat, square metal surface.

The police arrest Mr. Hallenbeck for the murder of his wife. They charge him with murder in the second degree. The prosecution theory is that Mr. Hallenbeck killed his wife in a jealous rage when he learned that she had given her jewelry to Greitz and was having an affair with him. The defense argues at the bail hearing that, because Mr. Hallenbeck has Alzheimer's disease, he was incapable of premeditated murder and was prone to uncontrolled fits.

In a clear departure from reality, defense counsel allows the prosecutor's psychiatrist to question Mr. Hallenbeck, outside the presence of counsel, to explore what happened immediately before and after he hit his wife. No competent defense attorney would ever allow such an interview to take place, particularly in the absence of counsel, and certainly not where the defendant is prepared to admit the crime and is the only witness to it. Mr. Hallenbeck tells the prosecutor's psychiatrist that, while his daughter was out of the room, he hit his wife because she had given a gift from him (the watch) to a boyfriend (Greitz). He also says that he didn't go for help or ask his daughter to go for help after his wife fell to the floor and hit her head. The psychiatrist concludes that Mr. Hallenbeck understood that his wife was seeing another man and knew what he was doing when he struck her and left her on the solarium floor. He also concludes that Mr. Hallenbeck is in the intermediate stages of Alzheimer's disease and thus will not become incompetent for eight to ten years.

The prosecution then offers the defendant a plea to manslaughter in the first degree, with six to twelve years in jail. In light of her client's Alzheimer's condition, the defense counsel will not accept jail time. An important point: No Manhattan prosecutor would ever charge Mr. Hallenbeck with murder in the second degree as was done in this episode. Mrs. Hallenbeck's death was essentially an accident, caused by the fact that she was unconscious and unable to get help for her internal injuries. There is no evidence that Mr. Hallenbeck intended to cause his wife's death. Similarly, even manslaughter in the first degree is an improper charge because Mr. Hallenbeck exhibited no intent to cause his wife serious physical injury. A prosecutor would probably not even charge manslaughter in the second degree, because the defendant here did not recklessly cause his wife's death. A prosecutor might very well charge the defendant with criminally negligent homicide under the theory that, after punching his wife and causing her to fall to the ground and lose consciousness, Mr. Hallenbeck was negligent in failing to obtain help for his wife. However, even this theory could be vulnerable to an argument that, given the defendant's Alzheimer's condition, the prosecutor could not even prove criminal negligence beyond a reasonable doubt. At trial, the defendant might end up convicted of nothing more than assault in the third degree, a misdemeanor.

All that being said, the defense counsel oddly does not attempt to assert a defense of not guilty by reason of insanity. Instead, she moves to dismiss the charges under the Eighth Amendment, arguing that incarcerating an Alzheimer's patient in the psychiatric ward of a prison would be cruel and unusual punishment. We are told that conditions in the prison ward are deplorable compared to those in facilities for the criminally insane. We are also told that there are a small number of Alzheimer's patients in the state prison system, but that there are no facilities to accommodate their needs for familiar surroundings and family contact. While the lack of treatment in the prison system for such patients is clearly tragic, the court in this episode correctly denies the defendant's motion to dismiss the charges under the Eighth Amendment. Mr. Hallenbeck was of sound mind at the time of the crime and understood what he had done and why he had done it. Despite his illness, he is capable of assisting his counsel in his defense. In the eyes of the law, he is no different from a prisoner who develops Alzheimer's while incarcerated.

In a humane gesture, the prosecution offers (and the defense accepts) an offer for the defendant to serve six years in a halfway house. The episode highlights the difficulties of dealing with an Alzheimer's patient in a state prison system. The real injustice here, though, is committed by the prosecution. The prosecutors overcharge Mr. Hallenbeck with murder and accept a plea to manslaughter where the facts do not even begin to support these charges.

Past Reviews

Message Boards

Disclaimer