Underpinnings of the Competence to Stand Trial Standard

2019 ◽  
pp. 77-99
Author(s):  
Thomas L. Hafemeister
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Competence To Stand Trial ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Incompetent To Stand Trial ◽  
Why Questions

Chapter 3 begins a discussion of competency to stand trial (CST) determinations. CST is arguably the most significant mental health inquiry associated with criminal justice proceedings. It is a “bedrock” issue in that the United States Supreme Court (USSC) has ruled that a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to a fair trial is violated if the trial proceeds while the defendant is incompetent to stand trial (IST). This chapter examines the initial USSC ruling establishing CST as a constitutional right, its underlying principles and the forces that likely shaped the Court’s determination, and why this right was only recognized relatively recently. It also describes the doctrine’s “public” face as shaped by a few highly-publicized cases, and why questions regarding defendants’ CST are not raised as frequently as they probably should be.

The Civil Commitment of Sex Offenders in Light of Foucha v. Louisiana

1993 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
RUDOLPH ALEXANDER
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Mental Health System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Commitment ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that an individual who has been judged insane and committed to a mental facility and who has regained his sanity but remains dangerous cannot continue to be confined. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Kennedy stated that the majority's decision might have put in doubt the civil commitment of persons other than insanity acquittees. The author of this essay contends that the Court's decision indeed did so and argues that dangerous or predatory sex offenders cannot now be civilly committed to mental institutions. The author argues also that the criminal justice system, rather than the mental health system, is more appropriate for controlling sex offenders.

Recent Legal Developments: Criminal Justice Decisions of the United States Supreme Court, 2,020 Term

2021 ◽  
pp. 073401682110595
Author(s):  
Craig Hemmens ◽  
Cortney Dalton ◽  
Christopher Dollar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Fourth Amendment ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Eighth Amendment

In this paper we review and analyze the criminal justice-related decisions of the 2,020 term of the United States Supreme Court. We also provide a summary of the Court’s voting patterns and opinion authorship. Thirteen of the Court’s 57 decisions touched on criminal justice. There were significant decisions involving the Fourth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment, and federal criminal statutes. Each of these is discussed in turn.

United States Supreme Court and Psychiatry: A Critical Look

1985 ◽  
Vol 13 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 137-164
Author(s):  
Carl P. Malmquist
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
The Right

The entrance of the United States Supreme Court into the field of mental health law in the last decade has been seen by some as heralding a commitment of the Court to mental health issues. A review of key cases reveals a disjointed approach to the issues with an ambivalence and inconsistency in the viewpoint taken toward the role and efficacy of psychiatry. While some cases have emphasized individual rights, such as incompetency issues, and a newly created right to psychiatric assistance at trial for indigents, other cases have refused to give psychiatric treatment centers the right to administer treatment without at least administrative if not judicial supervision. The cases reveal the lack of an overall jurisprudential viewpoint, and perhaps even a trend to return to the level of letting each state go its own way.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document