Go on. Explore!

lvl 0 • 0 xp

lvl 1

Home Market Decks Interests

competence

memorize.ai (lvl 286)

Section 1

Preview this deck

what person is most often judged to be incompetent to stand trial

Front

1 / 22

Competition Prep

0.0

0 reviews

5			0
4			0
3			0
2			0
1			0

Active users

All-time users

Favorites

Last updated

1 year ago

Date created

Mar 14, 2020

Cards (22)

Section 1

(22 cards)

what person is most often judged to be incompetent to stand trial

Front

-history of psychosis -exhibits symptoms of current mental disorder -single, unemployed. uneducated -scores poorly on competence assessment

Back

US supreme court-Godinez v Moran, 1993

Front

-standard for competence to stand trial is applied in federal courts to other competence questions that arise in the criminal justice process -rejects the idea that competence to plead guilty involves a higher standard than competence to stand trial -competence to stand trial acquired broader meaning after this decision adjudicative competence=competence to stand trial AFTER Godinez

Back

competence to refuse insanity defense

Front

some courts suggest that only mentally responsible persons should be punished, thus requiring insanity plea on unwilling defendants -Others use the framework of competence to answer this question. Frendak v. United States (1979) ruled that if the defendant understands the alternative pleas and their consequences, the defendant should be permitted to reject an insanity plea.

Back

defendants may be determined to be incompetent if they are seriously deficient in one or more abilities

Front

-understanding legal proceeding -communicating w attorneys -appreciating their role in the proceedings -making legally relevant decisions

Back

Dusky v US 1960 "the Dusky standard"

Front

-the accepted national standard for competence to stand trial is a "sufficient present ability to consult w ones attorney w a reasonable degree of rational understanding and a factual understanding of the proceedings against one"

Back

those found IST

Front

charges occasionally dropped for less serious crimes, sometimes in exchange for requiring the defendant to receive treatment -typically hospitalized to restore competence -most defendants have adjudicative competence restored w in 6 months

Back

in formal competence hearings who bears the burden of proof

Front

a state can require a criminal defendant to shoulder the burden of proving that he or she is incompetent -most states established the criterion to be a preponderance of the evidence -defendant had to show that it was more likely than not that he or she was incompetent.

Back

evaluating competence

Front

-question of competence can be brought up at any time in crij process by either side or judge -judge orders competence evaluation:consider circumstances of the case & behavior of defendant, examination conducted -defendant is evaluated by mental health prof: usually outpatient, psychologists do most

Back

Results of Competence Evaluations

Front

-up to 60,000 defendants are evaluated each year to determine competence -70% referred for eval found competent -judges agree w clinician decision -opposing attorneys often agree w clinician -after assessment eval communicate w judge -in controversial case, more likely there will be a formal competence hearing where evaluating experts testify

Back

issues of competence forcibly medicating

Front

the gov may administer psychotropic trtmt if it is -medically appropriate -substantially unlikely to have side effects that may undermine trial fairness -necessary to sig further important gov trial related interests

Back

competence to stand trial

Front

capacity to function meaningfully & knowingly in a legal proceeding -a need for attention, concentration, and behavioral control. concerned w the defendants present ability KNOWINGLY & MEANINGFULLY

Back

competence to waive miranda rights

Front

-once in police custody, defendants make a confession after having waived the 5th amendment right to avoid self-incrimination in a knowing, intelligent & voluntary fashion -challenging bc usually the waiver & confession have occurred months before the professional's evaluation

Back

1975, the case of Drope v. MO

Front

expanded the legal standard of competence to include the capacity to assist in preparing one's own defense.

Back

the standard for competence to stand trial was defined by the the US Supreme court in

Front

Dusky v US 1960

Back

competence to plead guilty

Front

requires defendants understand alternatives they face and have the ability to make a reasoned choice among them -must be able to make a rational choice between the alternatives. This requires cognitive awareness and reasoning.

Back

what is most important in making competence determinations? Redding, Floyd, Hawk, 2001

Front

-Study asked judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys to rank order 8 items typically offered by expert witnesses in competence evaluations (e.g., clinical diagnosis, weighing different motives and explanations, providing an ultimate opinion on the legal issue) -judges & prosecutors agree that expert's final opinion is one of top 3 most important pieces of info

Back

competence to be executed

Front

US supreme court case Ford v Wainright, 1986 prohibits execution of defendants while theyre competent

Back

issues of competence hospitalization

Front

-defendants whose competence cannot be restored are typically committed to a hospital thru involuntary civil commitment proceedings

Back

what happens if the evaluator believes the defendant is not competent?

Front

-if he thinks defendant has capacities to be competent, eval will prepare report that states this opinion & reasons -if not, report will discuss possible treatments to make defendant competent

Back

what happens when treatment is not successful in restoring competence

Front

-the jackson ruling bars the indefinite confinement -many states permit the defendant to be hospitalized for a period up to the max sentence that he or she could have received if convicted of the charges

Back

"Dusky Standard" of competence.

Front

Milton Dusky, 33 year old man, assisted 2 teenagers in raping a 16 yr. old. He was charged with Kidnapping. -He had schizophrenia, was found Competent to Stand Trial, got 45 yrs. -Supreme Court said Competent to Stand Trial means "Defendant has sufficient present ability to consult with lawyer with reasonable degree of rational & factual understanding of proceedings against him." -It is not sufficient to find him oriented to time, place, and some events.

Back

competence to be sentenced

Front

-understand the punishment and the reasons it is being imposed, can meaningfully execute their right to address the court at sentencing

Back