On Oct. 7, 2024, the Criminal Division of the Addison County District Court heard a brief competency hearing for Jerry L. Hoffman, who was charged last spring with attempted murder in the second degree, aggravated assault with a weapon and resisting arrest.
On March 20, 2024, Hoffman approached Huy Tran ’24 from behind and attacked him with a knife. He was charged with attempted murder in the second degree, aggravated assault with a weapon and resisting arrest.
Hoffman, who has pleaded not guilty and is currently being held without bail, joined the hearing remotely from Marble Valley Correctional Facility, while his attorney James Arthur Gratton arrived in person. Judge Robert W. Katims presided over the hearing and Addison County State’s Attorney Eva P. Vekos represented the state.
If convicted of the current charges, Hoffman would face life in prison and heavy fines. In the initial weight-of-the-evidence hearing, which took place on March 28 — seven days after the attack — Hoffman’s attorney Gratton had requested for Hoffman to receive a mental competency exam. As a result, the hearing was postponed.
A status conference, in which major evidence to support Hoffman’s plea could be presented, was then set for June 21. However, the State of Vermont v. Jerry Hoffman hearing was then rescheduled to Oct. 7 as a competency hearing, a court proceeding that determines whether a defendant is mentally able to stand trial.
Apart from the hearing and the police records filed to the court in March and April, an update on Sept. 13, 2024 included the Vermont Forensic Laboratory’s most recent test report, according to court records from the Vermont Judiciary. The test result shows the DNA sample found on the knife, which was discovered at Hoffman’s dwelling the day after the stabbing, matched that of Tran’s.
During the competency hearing this week, Gratton put forward a new request for obtaining a sanity assessment for Hoffman, asking the court to consider his mental state at the time of the incident.
While the idea of competency relates to the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the trial, sanity refers to the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the offense, according to the American Psychological Association. To request a sanity assessment is to seek a determination of the potential presence of mental illnesses or defects when the crime was committed.
According to the Vermont State Law Sec. 1. 13 V.S.A. § 4801, “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect the person lacks adequate capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the person’s conduct or to conform the person’s conduct to the requirements of law.”
Generally, the defendant should be interviewed as soon as possible after the offense, since early evaluation reduces the likelihood of misjudgments due to lack of evidence or unconscious distortion of memory. However, in many cases, defendants are often evaluated many months after the offense.
The defendant should provide a psychiatric history, including inquiries into the nature of hallucinations, delusions and past treatment efforts. The psychiatrist should also request a detailed account of the crime. It is useful for evaluations to trace the defendant’s step-by-step account of his or her actions beginning one or two days before the offense. The account should include details on psychiatric symptoms, medication adherence and use of intoxicants.
For sanity assessments, the defendant usually reaches out to an external forensic assessment agency with licensed psychiatrists for the service. Forensic psychiatrists then follow a a standard evaluation process to assess the defendant’s sanity at the time of the crime. This process analyzes factors such as their demonstrated knowledge that they committed a crime — such as whether they hid evidence or fled the crime scene — and of the rationality of their possible motives.
According to Vermont State laws, the Office of the Defender General shall pay for the evaluation of an indigent defendant. Gratton noted to the judge during the hearing that the current expense for obtaining an assessment can be high.
The hearing concluded with the court allowing another 30 days for Hoffman and his attorney to arrange for a sanity assessment in order to stipulate a timeline for a forthcoming trial, dates to be determined. The next hearing is scheduled for Nov. 4, 2024 at 9 a.m. at the Addison County District Court.
