Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Juvenile Competency And Pretrial Due Process: A Call For Greater Protections In Massachusetts For Juveniles Residing In Procedural Purgatory, Wendy J. Kaplan, Mark Rapisarda Dec 2016

Juvenile Competency And Pretrial Due Process: A Call For Greater Protections In Massachusetts For Juveniles Residing In Procedural Purgatory, Wendy J. Kaplan, Mark Rapisarda

Faculty Scholarship

While juvenile courts continue to balance and reevaluate the dual goals of community safety and rehabilitation of youth, juveniles who are not competent to stand trial have been left without sufficient procedural protections. This paper examines Massachusetts’ approach to juvenile competency, due process, and pretrial procedure, within a national context. The inadequacies of the Massachusetts juvenile competency laws are not unique. Currently there are nineteen states that either entirely lack juvenile-specific competency legislation or merely incorporate inapposite adult criminal statutes and standards into the juvenile context—making it difficult or impossible for those juvenile courts to dismiss or divert a delinquency …


Actions Speak Louder Than Images: The Use Of Neuroscientific Evidence In Criminal Cases, Stephen J. Morse Jun 2016

Actions Speak Louder Than Images: The Use Of Neuroscientific Evidence In Criminal Cases, Stephen J. Morse

All Faculty Scholarship

This invited commentary for Journal of Law & the Biosciences considers four empirical studies previously published in the journal of the reception of neuroscientific evidence in criminal cases in the United States, Canada, England and Wales, and the Netherlands. There are conceded methodological problems with all, but the data are nonetheless instructive and suggestive. The thesis of the comment is that the courts are committing the same errors that have bedeviled the reception of psychiatric and psychological evidence. There is insufficient caution about the state of the science, and more importantly, there is insufficient understanding of the relevance of the …


Sufficiently Safeguarded?: Competency Evaluations Of Mentally Ill Respondents In Removal Proceedings, Sarah R. Sherman-Stokes May 2016

Sufficiently Safeguarded?: Competency Evaluations Of Mentally Ill Respondents In Removal Proceedings, Sarah R. Sherman-Stokes

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I examine the current regime for making mental competency determinations of mentally ill and incompetent noncitizen respondents in immigration court. In its present iteration, mental competency determinations in immigration court are made by immigration judges, most commonly without the benefit of any mental health evaluation or expertise. In reflecting on the protections and processes in place in the criminal justice system, and on interviews with removal defense practitioners at ten different sites across the United States, I conclude that the role of the immigration judge in mental competency determinations must be changed in order to protect the …


Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon Jan 2016

Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon

Scholarly Works

Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals often testify as forensic experts in civil commitment and criminal competency proceedings. When an individual clinician assumes both a treatment and a forensic role in the context of a single case, however, that clinician forms a dual relationship with the patient—a practice that creates a conflict of interest and violates professional ethical guidelines. The court, the parties, and the patient are all affected by this conflict and the biased testimony that may result from dual relationships. When providing forensic testimony, the mental health professional’s primary duty is to the court, not to the patient, …


Communication And Competence For Self-Representation, E. Lea Johnston Jan 2016

Communication And Competence For Self-Representation, E. Lea Johnston

UF Law Faculty Publications

In Indiana v. Edwards, the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may impose a higher competency standard for self-representation than to stand trial in criminal cases. While the Court articulated a number of interests relevant to representational competence, it left to states the difficult task of formulating an actual competence standard. This Article offers the first examination and assessment of the constitutionality of state standards post-Edwards. It reveals that seven states have endorsed a representational competence standard with a communication component. Additionally, twenty states have embraced vague, capacious standards that could consider communication skills. States have applied these standards to …