1/20
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced | Call with Kai |
|---|
No study sessions yet.
dusky v united states
set the dusky standard addressing defendant psychological state at the time of trial
cooper v oklahoma
presumption of competency to stand trial established
medina v california
preponderance of evidence standard used for competency to stand trial
estelle v smith
competency to stand trial evaluations only introduced if defendant places their mental state into evidence
jackson v indiana
indefinite commitment of a defendant because of incompetency to stand trial is unconstitutional
rex v arnold
wild beast test
m’naghten
presumption that defendants are sane and responsible for their crime
durham v united states
guilty verdict overturned on appeal with prevailing insanity - “durham standard”
united states v brawned
removed the durham standard from DC courts
tarasoff v regents of the united states of california
civil suit against UC Berkeley suggesting Poddar’s therapist failed to warn Tarasoff about a dangerous patient, breaching their primary duty to protect the public
kansas v hendricks
first individual to be held under SVP laws (civil confinement of high risk potentially dangerous sex offenders)
united states v booker
judges do not mandatorily have to use the guidelines for sentencing
ruiz v johnson
solitary confinement cells are psychologically damaging and exacerbate existing mental health issues
cooper v pate
prisoners have the right to freely practice religion
procunier v martinez
prisoners have the right to send and receive mail
atkins v virginia
eliminated the death penalty for people with intellectual disabilities
ring v arizona
only juries can make decisions about the death penalty
panetti v quarterman
prisoner on death row must have a rational understanding of the reason for their execution
kennedy v louisiana
prohibits the death penalty for child rapists unless the child dies during the rape
roper v simmons
juveniles cannot be executed
lockett v ohio
must consider aggregating and mitigating factors when determining death penalty