160 likes | 185 Views
Criminal and Civil Competence. Chapter 8. Raising the Issue of Competency in Criminal Proceedings. focus on present mental state, at any given instance must understand the nature and purposes of the criminal proceeding based in the 6th Amendment
E N D
Criminal and Civil Competence Chapter 8
Raising the Issue of Competency in Criminal Proceedings • focus on present mental state, at any given instance • must understand the nature and purposes of the criminal proceeding • based in the 6th Amendment • right to be informed of the nature of the accusation, right to confront witness, and right to assistance of counsel
Differences between competency and insanity • Focus on mental state at time of crime versus focus on present • Insanity is a legal defense to a criminal charge whereas competency ensures fairness of the process • Standards are vastly different • Threshold for finding • Insanity requires presence of mental illness • Competency evaluation does not necessitate the defendant to admit guilt
Competency to Stand Trial (CST) • Related to notion of defendant being in abstentia • Dusky v. United States (1960) • "sufficient present ability to consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and . . . a rational, as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him”
Prevalence of CST • 60,000 competency evaluations each year • Most frequently occurring forensic evaluation • Occurs in 2-8% of all felony cases • Attorneys have doubts about their client’s competency in 15% of cases • 20% of defendants referred for competency evaluations are found incompetent
Procedure for CST • Reasons for ensuring competency • A competent defendant increases accuracy of trial • Defendant must be allowed to exercise full rights • Integrity of process could be questioned • Purpose of punishment is not upheld • Competency evaluation, hearing may be scheduled if competency is contested, delay of trial if found incompetent, process continues if found competent • “defendants could not be held more than a reasonable period of time necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that they will attain capacity in the foreseeable future” (Jackson v. Indiana, 1972)
Competency Evaluations • Significant agreement among experts and judges • No standard approach • Experts split on importance of using psychological testing • Most review past records (police report, mental health records, etc.)
Measures of Competence • Competency Screening Test (CST) • Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT) • The Fitness Interview Test (FIT) • MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT- CA)
A Comprehensive Approach to Competency Evaluations • Functional - legally relevant psychological abilities • Causal - probable explanation for functional deficits • Interactive - differential abilities required for specific trials • Conclusory - expert’s ultimate opinion • Prescriptive - gather dispositionally relevant information
Characteristics of Incompetent Defendants • Psychotic, organic and mental retardation are most prominent diagnoses among incompetent defendants • No clear conclusion regarding demographic variables • Criminal charges are relevant but maybe only as they relate to mental illness
Other variables related to competence • Professional differences • Forensic psychologists • Use more collateral information • Produce more clinical notes • Complete more useful reports • More frequently use psychological testing • Use more and longer interviews • Spend more time preparing than forensic psychiatrists • Professional setting: outpatient v. inpatient • Outpatient settings are more likely to use psychological testing, take more time, use fewer evaluators, conduct fewer clinical interviews
Scope of Practice in Competency Evaluations • Potential confusion by mental health professionals of competency and insanity • May try to address both issues simultaneously • Total reliance of the court on professional opinion • Court and expert opinion agree in 90% of cases
Restoration of Competency • Process by which an incompetent defendant becomes competent • Hospitalizations are typically short • Over 75% of all individuals are restored to competency • Small number of failures makes research difficult • Restored individuals were more likely to have a previous criminal history, current violence charge, minor diagnosis, previous mental health contact, previous hospitalization, and prior use of psychotropic medication
Competency Restoration Programs • Administration of medication • Involuntary medication • Implementation of traditional treatment combined with psychoeducational interventions • Psychoeducational interventions are effective if defendant is able to pay attention, concentrate, and cooperate • Involuntary treatment can still be beneficial • Incompetent defendants don’t always received specialized treatment
Other Criminal Competencies • Competence to be Executed • Ford v. Wainwright (1986) • Competence to Waive Miranda • Competency to confess and waive counsel • Competence to Refuse Insanity Defense • Frendak v. United States (1979)
Civil Competencies • Core issues are very similar to criminal competencies • Generally focus on ability to make an everyday decision • Competence for Treatment • Real issues is competency to refuse treatment • Competence to Execute a Will • Must often rely on past records because if lack of availability of dead guy/gal • Competence Related to Guardianship • Lack of formal legal standards