scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Reforming Incompetency to Stand Trial and Plead Guilty: A Restated Proposal and a Response to Professor Bonnie

Bruce J. Winick
- 01 Jan 1995 - 
- Vol. 85, Iss: 3, pp 571
About
This article is published in Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology.The article was published on 1995-01-01 and is currently open access. It has received 31 citations till now.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Logic and reliability of evaluations of competence to stand trial.

TL;DR: Community examiners' reports on competence to stand trial (CST) reflect basic operationalizations of competence that fail to incorporate legally relevant facets such as a defendant's decisional capacities and adequately document clinical findings, but fail to describe the reasoning underlying psycholegal conclusions.
Journal ArticleDOI

Have the Courts Abdicated Their Responsibility for Determination of Competency to Stand Trial to Clinicians

TL;DR: In this article, the concordance rate between mental health professionals' opinions regarding competency and the courts' determinations of competency for 328 defendants referred for competency evaluation in Alabama, and the quality of the reports in terms of whether or not they contained specific content as set out in Alabama statute was investigated.

Defining and assessing competency to stand trial.

TL;DR: An overview of competency laws, research, and methods of assessment with the aim of providing forensic psychologists with the basic information they need to conduct competency evaluations is given in this article.
Journal ArticleDOI

Opinion formation in evaluating the adjudicative competence and restorability of criminal defendants: a review of 8,000 evaluations.

TL;DR: Overall, clinicians opined that 19% of defendants were incompetent and considered 23% of these unlikely to be restored to competence and there were some notable differences between evaluations by psychologists versus psychiatrists and between evaluations conducted in inpatient versus outpatient settings.
Journal ArticleDOI

Community Examiners' Evaluations of Competence to Stand Trial: Common Problems and Suggestions for Improvement

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors focus on the importance of properly attending to the range of critical psyeholegal abilities, including the defendant's decisional capacities, explaining the critical reasoning that underlies one's psycholegal eunclusiuns, and using forensically relevant methods of assessment.
Frequently Asked Questions (12)
Q1. What have the authors stated for future works in "Reforming incompetency to stand trial and plead guilty: a restated proposal and a response to professor bonnie" ?

187 Although this presumption might permit waiver by some defendants presumed competent who actually are incompetent, Medina v. California shows that a procedural rule governing the determination of criminal competency is not unconstitutional, even though it fails to eliminate the possibility of error in the application of the incompetency test. 188 States are reluctant to experiment in areas that seem settled by constitutional doctrine, particularly when the results might place criminal convictions and guilty pleas in jeopardy. Hopefully, this scholarly dialogue will continue, and further empirical and theoretical work will investigate the questions it raises. His examination of attorney-client interactions in the areas in which the defendant 's decisional competence may be at issue is also useful. 

Because competency is a fluctuating state, and a defendant's condition may change during the course of a trial, the trial judge has a duty to reconsider the issue any time there is a reasonable doubt about the defendant's competency. 

200Substituting a system of trial continuances for the existing formal incompetency process also would have the salutary effect of avoiding unnecessary incompetency labeling. 

Because a high percentage of incompetency cases arise out of misdemeanor charges, such a rule would eliminate much of the cost and many of the burdens of the incompetency process. 

68 For decisionmaking about how to plead, if the defendant is decisionally incompetent, Professor Bonnie would allow the attorney to plead the defendant not guilty and obtain a trial, but would not permit a plea of guilty. 

Because the jury trial right serves important societal as well as individual interests, it may not be waived unilaterally by the defendant. 

For decisionmaking about jury trial, if the defendant is decisionally incompetent, Professor Bonnie would allow the attorney to make the decision. 

The law, however, commits a small number of these decisions to the defendant-decisions regarding the plea, whether to waive the right to trial by jury, and whether the defendant will be present and will testify. 

As mentioned, courts can treat their decisions to honor a defendant's desire to stand trial as provisional, and reconsider them as the trial unfolds if the defendant's conduct or demeanor suggests incompetency, or if defense counsel decides to raise the issue. 

I argued, finally, that even if the court deems the defendant incompetent to waive the supposed benefits of the incompetency doctrine, it should permit defense counsel to waive the doctrine on behalf of the defendant on the grounds that defense lawyers, as fiduciaries, can substitute their judgment for that of an incompetent client. 

Both allowing a measure of surrogate decisionmaking by counsel and instituting a presumption in favor of competency in cases of assent provide greater deference to the autonomy both of the individual and of the attorney-client relationship consistent with the protective objectives and societal concerns underlying the incompetency doctrine. 

In addition, counsel will be appointed for indigent defendants in all felony and in serious misdemeanor cases in which the defendant receives a term of imprisonment.