Competency to Stand Trial (CST)

Competency to Stand Trial (CST)

Definition of Competency

  • Competency to stand trial is a legal standard regarding an individual’s capacity to:

    • Understand their criminal case.

    • Participate meaningfully in their trial.

  • The philosophy of CST is rooted in due process rights under the Fifth Amendment, emphasizing that it would violate these rights to subject an individual to a trial if they lack awareness of the proceedings.

Legal Background

  • The definition of CST emerged from the case of Dusky v. U.S.:

"The test must be whether [the defendant] has sufficient present ability to consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of rational understanding – and whether he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him."

  • Citation: Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, p. 403.

Prongs of the Dusky Standard

  • The Dusky standard comprises two critical components, referred to as "prongs":

    1. Sufficient present ability to consult with his attorney

    • Relates to foundational and decisional competency.

    • It involves the defendant's ability to work with their attorney and make informed decisions.

    1. Rational and factual understanding of the proceedings

    • Concerns the defendant’s comprehension of courtroom processes, personnel, and charges.

Important Considerations Regarding Competency

  • Capacity vs. Willingness

    • Competency assesses ability, not willingness. A defendant’s refusal to cooperate does not equate to incompetency.

  • Present Capacity

    • Competency is evaluated at a specific moment in time, and can fluctuate, particularly with mental health variations.

  • Mental Illness

    • Presence of mental illness does not automatically imply incompetency. It only pertains to the defined capabilities.

  • Presumption of Competency

    • Estabished by Cooper v. Oklahoma (1996) and Medina v. California (1992), the presumption of competency holds unless proven otherwise.

Levels of Competency

  • Commonly discussed form: Competency to stand trial (also known as competency to proceed).

  • Lesser-known forms include:

    • Competency to plead guilty

    • Assesses if the defendant understands the implications of their plea and the trial’s stressors.

    • Competency to waive an attorney

    • Concerns a defendant’s understanding of waiving their legal representation.

Assessment of Competency

  • When competency is challenged, a court orders a competency evaluation, usually requested for strategic reasons.

  • Evaluations are conducted by qualified mental health professionals (specific qualifications vary by state).

  • Although judges make the final competency determination, assessments are inherently psychological in nature.

  • Discretion in Assessments

    • No standardized protocols exist for competency assessment, leading to evaluators having significant discretion.

    • Judges typically align with evaluators' opinions in over 80% of cases, according to research (Pirelli et al., 2014; Warren et al., 2016).

Forensic Assessment Instruments (FAIs)

  • Research has prompted the development of various FAIs to enhance evaluation processes, including:

    • Competency Screening Test

    • MacArthur Structured Assessment of the Competencies of Criminal Defendants

    • MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool–Criminal Adjudication

Use of Forensic Assessment Instruments

  • FAIs are efficient, standardized, and objective but may overlook individual case complexities. Their implementation is limited in routine evaluations but may feature in competency hearings.

Post-Evaluation Outcomes

  • Following the evaluation, qualified mental health examiners provide a clinical opinion, culminating in a report for judicial consideration.

  • The standard for CST finding is preponderance of the evidence, meaning the court must have over 50% certainty of incompetence to deem a defendant incompetent.

    • In New York State, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to demonstrate a defendant’s competency.

    • Neglecting to address competency issues post-evaluation can cause subsequent convictions to be overturned.

Assessment Outcomes

  • If deemed competent, the criminal case continues as normal.

  • If found incompetent, the legal process halts, with various procedural outcomes depending on charge type:

    • Felony Cases:

    • Defendants can undergo restoration processes for regaining competency. They will be committed to psychiatric facilities until deemed fit.

    • Misdemeanor Cases:

    • Such cases may be dismissed, without further action possible.

    • Under CPL §730.40, a final order of observation may lead to a treatment commitment of up to 90 days, but subsequent commitments require civil standards.

Role of Expert Witnesses

  • In contested findings, hearings may involve initial evaluators giving testimony.

  • The opposing party can appoint an expert witness for independent evaluation; experts cannot conclusively judge competency, since this remains a legal determination.

Malingering and Its Detection

  • Malingering involves intentional exaggeration or fabrication of symptoms for personal gain, such as postponing trial or seeking psychiatric housing.

  • The Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R) has demonstrated effectiveness in detecting feigned incompetence and includes measures of symptom validity through atypical presentation scales.

  • Note: ECST-R is not validated for those with IQs < 60, necessitating further research (Anderson et al., 2022).

Children and Competency

  • Due to developmental factors, children may often be found incompetent to stand trial. Defendants under 15, mentally ill, or with developmental disabilities are particularly likely to be deemed incompetent (Bath et al., 2015).

  • Forensic psychologists recommend evaluations for juvenile defendants based on age, mental health, or cognitive deficits.

Study Findings on Juvenile Competency

  • A study by Grisso et al. (2003) involving 1,000 participants indicated:

    • 11-13 year-olds:

    • 30% exhibited CST impairment;

    • 50% more likely to confess during police questioning;

    • 75% likely to accept plea bargains.

    • 14-15 year-olds:

    • 20% showed competency impairment;

    • 20% were likely to confess during police questioning;

    • 50% would accept plea deals.

    • 16-17 year-olds:

    • 10% had CST impairment;

    • 20% likely to confess during questioning;

    • 50% willing to accept plea deals.

Competency Standards in New York State

  • Article 730 of New York State Criminal Procedure Law outlines the state definition of competency, termed "fitness."

  • An individual is deemed competent if fit, whereas unfitness indicates incapacity due to mental disease or defect that hinders understanding of trial proceedings.

    • Definition of unfit is:
      > "Incapacitated person" means a defendant who as a result of mental disease or defect lacks capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his own defense. (CPL §730.10)

730 Case Outcome Procedures

  • When unfitness is suspected, a petition for a 730 exam can be filed by defense counsel.

  • Examined by two qualified professionals, the findings are reported back to the court for a decision.

  • If found fit, the legal process proceeds; if not, it affects further proceedings significantly.

Restoration Process for Unfit Defendants

  • Defendants in felony cases who are found unfit may undergo treatment centered on restoring their competency.

  • They will be temporarily committed to psychiatric facilities for restoration, with the criminal process entering a period of suspension.

Misdemeanor Case Outcome

  • For misdemeanor charges, a finding of unfit results in automatic case dismissal, as stipulated by CPL §730.40.

  • Individuals may be committed to a hospital for a short-term observation, generally up to 90 days, but continuing stays need to meet civil commitment standards (Ritter v. Surles, 1988).