Chapter 1-6: Competence to Stand Trial (Introduction through Legal Context)

Vocabulary flashcards covering the key concepts, cases, tools, and distinctions related to competence to stand trial based on the provided lecture notes.

Competence to stand trial

A legal judgment about a defendant's present ability to understand the proceedings and participate in their defense, including consulting with their attorney; the judge makes the final determination based on a clinician's evaluation.

Sixth Amendment

Constitutional right ensuring fair criminal proceedings, including the right to a speedy and public trial, an impartial jury, information about the charges, confrontation of witnesses, compulsory process, and the assistance of counsel.

Dusky v. United States (1960) standard

Defendant's sufficient present ability to consult with counsel with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and factual understanding of the proceedings.

Present vs retrospective focus

Competence concerns the defendant's present abilities at trial; insanity concerns mental state at the time of the offense (retrospective).

In absentia

The idea that a defendant cannot be tried unless present, emphasizing both physical and mental presence.

Elizabeth Smart case

High-profile competency case in which Elizabeth Smart and co-defendants were found incompetent to stand trial for years, later restored to competence with treatment.

Jared Loughner Tucson case

Competency case illustrating restoration to competence after treatment and progression toward trial.

Competence restoration

Process by which an incompetent defendant becomes competent to stand trial, often via medication; most are restored within about six months.

Jackson v. Indiana (1972)

Supreme Court ruling that defendants cannot be held indefinitely for incompetence; states must define a reasonable time limit and may civilly commit if dangerous after that period.

Godinez v. Moran (1993)

Rule that the standard for all criminal competencies is uniform; being competent to stand trial implies competence to represent oneself at trial.

Indiana v. Edwards (2008)

Ruling that pro se competence can require higher functioning; the right to self-representation is limited by the defendant's ability to conduct the defense effectively.

MacCAT-CA

A 22-item, vignette-based tool that assesses general legal understanding and reasoning as it relates to the defendant's capacity to participate in legal decisions.

ECST-R

Semi-structured interview based on Dusky criteria; assesses factual and rational understanding and the ability to consult with counsel; includes a malingering scale.

CAIs (Clinical Assessment Instruments)

Clinical tools used for diagnosis or assessment in general clinical work; not specific to legal questions but informative when applied to legal issues.

Forensically relevant instruments

Tools with clinical and forensic relevance that are commonly used in forensic evaluations.

Forensic Assessment Instruments (FAIs)

Instruments designed to address specific legal questions (e.g., MacCAT-CA for competence to stand trial).

WAIS/WISC

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children; standardized intelligence tests used in competency evaluations.

TOMM

Test of Memory Malingering; a tool used to detect feigned memory impairment.

MFAST

Malingering-focused assessment tool used to screen for feigned mental illness or symptoms.

Malingering

The production of false or exaggerated symptoms to appear impaired; clinicians use specialized tests to detect it in evaluations.

Psychotic disorders and intellectual disability in incompetence

Psychotic disorders and intellectual disability are common diagnoses among those found incompetent; psychosis is more readily remediable with medication, whereas intellectual disability can be harder to remediate.

Psychoeducation

Educational interventions that teach defendants about courtroom processes to build foundational understanding when deficits are present.

Plea bargains and defense planning

Competence includes the ability to weigh defenses, negotiate pleas, and participate in planning legal strategy with counsel.

Waiving Miranda rights and pro se competence

Competence extends to waiving rights and representing oneself; requires contextual assessment of the defendant's ability to conduct the defense.

Contextual competency debates

Scholars debate whether different courtroom tasks require different standards; Godinez set a uniform standard, while Indiana v. Edwards recognized context-specific requirements for pro se representation.