Forensic Psychology Midterm Review

These flashcards cover key legal cases and concepts in forensic psychology, focusing on standards of expert testimony, competency, insanity defenses, and the rights of individuals within the legal system.

Frye v. United States (1923)

Established the General Acceptance Test, requiring expert testimony to be based on principles generally accepted in the scientific community.

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993)

Superseded Frye; established the Daubert Standard, where judges assess scientific validity using a 3-prong test.

Jenkins v. United States (1962)

Established that psychologists can qualify as expert witnesses on mental disorders in criminal cases.

Dusky v. United States (1960)

Established a standard for determining competency to stand trial, requiring factual and rational understanding of the proceedings.

M'Naghten Rule (1843)

Set the standard for the insanity defense, focusing on cognitive capacity to understand actions as right or wrong.

Durham v. United States (1954)

Created the Product Test, holding that individuals are not criminally responsible if unlawful acts are the product of mental illness.

United States v. Brawner (1972)

Adopted the ALI/Model Penal Code standard for insanity, including both cognitive and volitional impairments.

Atkins v. Virginia (2002)

Prohibited the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities, recognizing their status under the Eighth Amendment.

Roper v. Simmons (2005)

Declared it unconstitutional to execute individuals who were under 18 at the time of their crime.

Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California (1976)

Established the duty of therapists to warn and protect identifiable victims from credible threats made by their patients.

Estelle v. Smith (1981)

Held that using statements from a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation at sentencing without a Miranda warning violates Fifth Amendment rights.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Established the requirement for Miranda rights to be read to suspects in custody prior to interrogation.

Duty of Care

Legal obligation of a defendant to adhere to a standard of reasonable care, ensuring the safety of others.

Negligence

A failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like circumstances, leading to harm.

Compensatory Damages

Monetary awards intended to compensate victims for actual losses suffered due to injury.

Punitive Damages

Damages awarded to punish a defendant's egregious behavior and deter future misconduct.

Best Interest of the Child Standard

Custody decisions based on the welfare and development of the child, considering multiple factors tailored to each case.

Clear and Convincing Evidence

Standard of proof required for civil commitment, higher than preponderance of evidence but lower than beyond reasonable doubt.

Volitional Prong

Part of the insanity defense standard addressing whether an individual could conform their conduct to the law.