Competency evaluation (law)
Encyclopedia
In the United States
criminal justice
system, a competency evaluation is an assessment of the ability of a defendant
to understand and rationally participate in a court process.
Competency
was originally established by the Supreme Court of the United States
as the evaluation of a defendant's competence to proceed to trial
. In a subsequent ruling, the Court held that any prison
er facing the death penalty must be evaluated as competent to be executed, meaning that he must be capable of understanding why he has received the death penalty and the effect that the penalty will have. In further rulings, competence was also enlarged to include evaluation of the defendant's competence to plead guilty and competence to waive the right to counsel
.
The American Bar Association
's Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards stated in 1994 that the issue of a defendant's current mental incompetence is the single most important issue in the criminal mental health field, noting that an estimated 24,000 to 60,000 forensic evaluations of a criminal defendant's competency to stand trial were performed every year in the United States. Although estimates vary, a 1973 estimate put the number of competence evaluations at 25,000 to 36,000 each year. There are indications that the number of evaluations of criminal defendants is rising. One comparison of estimates between 1983 and 2004 suggest the annual number rose from 50,000 to 60,000 criminal competency evaluations respectively.
362 U.S. 402 (1960), in which the Court affirmed a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial. Competence to proceed was defined by the court as the defendant's ability to consult rationally with an attorney to aid in his own defense and to have a rational and factual understanding of the charges.
In this case, the defendant Dusky presented a petition of writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court requesting that his conviction be reversed on the grounds that he was not competent to stand trial at the time of the proceeding. The court decided to grant the writ, based on a lack of recent evidence that the petitioner was competent at the time of the trial. The case was remanded to the district court
for a new hearing to evaluate Dusky's competence to stand trial, and for a new trial if he was found competent.
The case set the current standard for adjudicative competency in the United States
. Although the statutes addressing competency vary from state to state in the United States
, the two elements outlined in the Dusky v. United States decision are held in common. The defendant must understand the charges and have the ability to aid his attorney in his own defense.
Competency to stand trial is generally determined via a pretrial evaluation of the defendant's overall mental status and mental state at the time of the examination. This evaluation aims to provide sufficient information to allow a judge to rule on the competency of the defendant should a motion to that effect be made by either the prosecutor or defense attorney. A judge may also directly rule a defendant incompetent to stand trial without receiving a motion to that effect from counsel.
Who is deemed qualified to conduct a competency evaluation varies from state to state. Originally competency evaluations included a range of tests and assessments. Recently the tendency is to simplify the process by relying upon an interview and, optionally, a psychological evaluation
. There are a number of standardized screening devices that also may be employed.
The right to be competent to be executed resulted from the outcome of a United States Supreme Court case, Ford v. Wainwright
, in which a Florida
inmate on death row
took his case to the United States Supreme Court, declaring he was not competent to be executed. He had been evaluated as incompetent but the Governor of Florida made an executive branch decision and signed the death warrant
anyway. The court ruled that a forensic
professional must make that evaluation and, if the inmate is found incompetent, provide treatment to aid in the inmate gaining competency in order that the execution can take place.
Providing treatment to an individual to enable that person to become competent to be executed places mental health professionals in an ethical dilemma
. The National Medical Association
takes the position that ethically it is a physician's duty to provide treatment, regardless of the patient's legal situation. Others feel that it unethical to treat a person in order to execute them. Most restorations of competency are accomplished through psychiatric medication.
.
In Godinez v. Moran
, 1993, the Supreme Court held that the competency standard for pleading guilty or waiving the right to counsel is the same as the competency standard for proceeding to trial as established in Dusky v. United States. A higher standard of competency is not required.
, malingering or feigning illness during a competency evaluation was held to be obstruction of justice
and led to an increased sentence.
affirmed the right to a competency evaluation, the specifics of the evaluation remain ambiguous. Each evaluator must decide what is meant by "sufficient present ability" and "has a rational as well as a factual understanding" as set forth in the Dusky decision. One common principle is clear in forensic evaluations, however. Forensic evaluators cannot reach a finding independent of the facts of the case at hand.
was initially found mentally incompetent to stand trial following the murder of his estranged girlfriend. But years later, as he had attended college and received good grades, this ruling was reversed, and he was ordered to stand trial.
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
criminal justice
Criminal justice
Criminal Justice is the system of practices and institutions of governments directed at upholding social control, deterring and mitigating crime, or sanctioning those who violate laws with criminal penalties and rehabilitation efforts...
system, a competency evaluation is an assessment of the ability of a defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
to understand and rationally participate in a court process.
Competency
Competence (law)
In American law, competence concerns the mental capacity of an individual to participate in legal proceedings. Defendants that do not possess sufficient "competence" are usually excluded from criminal prosecution, while witnesses found not to possess requisite competence cannot testify...
was originally established by the Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
as the evaluation of a defendant's competence to proceed to trial
Trial
A trial is, in the most general sense, a test, usually a test to see whether something does or does not meet a given standard.It may refer to:*Trial , the presentation of information in a formal setting, usually a court...
. In a subsequent ruling, the Court held that any prison
Prison
A prison is a place in which people are physically confined and, usually, deprived of a range of personal freedoms. Imprisonment or incarceration is a legal penalty that may be imposed by the state for the commission of a crime...
er facing the death penalty must be evaluated as competent to be executed, meaning that he must be capable of understanding why he has received the death penalty and the effect that the penalty will have. In further rulings, competence was also enlarged to include evaluation of the defendant's competence to plead guilty and competence to waive the right to counsel
Right to counsel
Right to counsel is currently generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial, allowing for the defendant to be assisted by counsel , and if he cannot afford his own lawyer, requiring that the government should appoint one for him/her, or pay his/her legal expenses...
.
The American Bar Association
American Bar Association
The American Bar Association , founded August 21, 1878, is a voluntary bar association of lawyers and law students, which is not specific to any jurisdiction in the United States. The ABA's most important stated activities are the setting of academic standards for law schools, and the formulation...
's Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards stated in 1994 that the issue of a defendant's current mental incompetence is the single most important issue in the criminal mental health field, noting that an estimated 24,000 to 60,000 forensic evaluations of a criminal defendant's competency to stand trial were performed every year in the United States. Although estimates vary, a 1973 estimate put the number of competence evaluations at 25,000 to 36,000 each year. There are indications that the number of evaluations of criminal defendants is rising. One comparison of estimates between 1983 and 2004 suggest the annual number rose from 50,000 to 60,000 criminal competency evaluations respectively.
Competence to proceed
This standard is based on the Supreme Court decision Dusky v. United StatesDusky v. United States
Dusky v. United States, , is a landmark decision affirming a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceding to trial. In this case, the court outlined the basic standards for determining competency....
362 U.S. 402 (1960), in which the Court affirmed a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial. Competence to proceed was defined by the court as the defendant's ability to consult rationally with an attorney to aid in his own defense and to have a rational and factual understanding of the charges.
In this case, the defendant Dusky presented a petition of writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court requesting that his conviction be reversed on the grounds that he was not competent to stand trial at the time of the proceeding. The court decided to grant the writ, based on a lack of recent evidence that the petitioner was competent at the time of the trial. The case was remanded to the district court
United States district court
The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of law, equity, and admiralty. There is a United States bankruptcy court associated with each United States...
for a new hearing to evaluate Dusky's competence to stand trial, and for a new trial if he was found competent.
The case set the current standard for adjudicative competency in the United States
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
. Although the statutes addressing competency vary from state to state in the United States
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
, the two elements outlined in the Dusky v. United States decision are held in common. The defendant must understand the charges and have the ability to aid his attorney in his own defense.
Competency to stand trial is generally determined via a pretrial evaluation of the defendant's overall mental status and mental state at the time of the examination. This evaluation aims to provide sufficient information to allow a judge to rule on the competency of the defendant should a motion to that effect be made by either the prosecutor or defense attorney. A judge may also directly rule a defendant incompetent to stand trial without receiving a motion to that effect from counsel.
Who is deemed qualified to conduct a competency evaluation varies from state to state. Originally competency evaluations included a range of tests and assessments. Recently the tendency is to simplify the process by relying upon an interview and, optionally, a psychological evaluation
Psychological evaluation
A psychological evaluation or mental examination is an examination into a person's mental health by a mental health professional such as a psychologist. A psychological evaluation may result in a diagnosis of a mental illness...
. There are a number of standardized screening devices that also may be employed.
Competence to be executed
An additional evaluation is of the competence to be executed, that is the defendant must be capable of understanding why he is being executed and the effect execution will have.The right to be competent to be executed resulted from the outcome of a United States Supreme Court case, Ford v. Wainwright
Ford v. Wainwright
Ford v. Wainwright, ', was the case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the common law rule that the insane cannot be executed; therefore the petitioner is entitled to a competency evaluation and to an evidentiary hearing in court on the question of his competency to be...
, in which a Florida
Florida
Florida is a state in the southeastern United States, located on the nation's Atlantic and Gulf coasts. It is bordered to the west by the Gulf of Mexico, to the north by Alabama and Georgia and to the east by the Atlantic Ocean. With a population of 18,801,310 as measured by the 2010 census, it...
inmate on death row
Death row
Death row signifies the place, often a section of a prison, that houses individuals awaiting execution. The term is also used figuratively to describe the state of awaiting execution , even in places where no special facility or separate unit for condemned inmates exists.After individuals are found...
took his case to the United States Supreme Court, declaring he was not competent to be executed. He had been evaluated as incompetent but the Governor of Florida made an executive branch decision and signed the death warrant
Execution warrant
An execution warrant is a writ which authorizes the execution of a judgment of death on an individual...
anyway. The court ruled that a forensic
Forensic psychology
Forensic psychology is the intersection between psychology and the criminal justice system. It involves understanding criminal law in the relevant jurisdictions in order to be able to interact appropriately with judges, attorneys and other legal professionals...
professional must make that evaluation and, if the inmate is found incompetent, provide treatment to aid in the inmate gaining competency in order that the execution can take place.
Providing treatment to an individual to enable that person to become competent to be executed places mental health professionals in an ethical dilemma
Ethical dilemma
An Ethical dilemma is a complex situation that will often involve an apparent mental conflict between moral imperatives, in which to obey one would result in transgressing another....
. The National Medical Association
National Medical Association
The National Medical Association is the largest and oldest national organization representing African American physicians and their patients in the United States...
takes the position that ethically it is a physician's duty to provide treatment, regardless of the patient's legal situation. Others feel that it unethical to treat a person in order to execute them. Most restorations of competency are accomplished through psychiatric medication.
Competence to plead guilty
It has been estimated that approximately 90 percent of all criminal cases in the United States are settled through guilty pleas, rather than a trialTrial
A trial is, in the most general sense, a test, usually a test to see whether something does or does not meet a given standard.It may refer to:*Trial , the presentation of information in a formal setting, usually a court...
.
In Godinez v. Moran
Godinez v. Moran
Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389 , was a landmark decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that if a defendant was competent to stand trial, they were automatically competent to plead guilty or waive the right to legal counsel.-Circumstances:...
, 1993, the Supreme Court held that the competency standard for pleading guilty or waiving the right to counsel is the same as the competency standard for proceeding to trial as established in Dusky v. United States. A higher standard of competency is not required.
Feigning incompetence
In United States v. BinionUnited States v. Binion
United States v. Binion, 132 F. App'x 89 , is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit applied two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions United States v. Binion, 132 F. App'x 89 (8th Cir. 2005), is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth...
, malingering or feigning illness during a competency evaluation was held to be obstruction of justice
Obstruction of justice
The crime of obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, refers to the crime of interfering with the work of police, investigators, regulatory agencies, prosecutors, or other officials...
and led to an increased sentence.
Right to waive competency to stand trial
In United States v. Morin, 338 F.3d 838 (8th Cir. 2003), the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, the court upheld the defendant's conviction. The court of appeals rejected Mr. Morin’s argument, among others, that the district court violated his due process rights by refusing to allow him to waive competency at trial. The court held that since his competency to stand trial was never challenged, the issue of whether he was entitled to waive competency to stand trial was properly not considered.Common principles
Although Dusky v. United StatesDusky v. United States
Dusky v. United States, , is a landmark decision affirming a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceding to trial. In this case, the court outlined the basic standards for determining competency....
affirmed the right to a competency evaluation, the specifics of the evaluation remain ambiguous. Each evaluator must decide what is meant by "sufficient present ability" and "has a rational as well as a factual understanding" as set forth in the Dusky decision. One common principle is clear in forensic evaluations, however. Forensic evaluators cannot reach a finding independent of the facts of the case at hand.
Notable cases
In 1989, Kenneth Curtis of Stratford, ConnecticutStratford, Connecticut
Stratford is a town in Fairfield County, Connecticut, United States, located on Long Island Sound at the mouth of the Housatonic River. It was founded by Puritans in 1639....
was initially found mentally incompetent to stand trial following the murder of his estranged girlfriend. But years later, as he had attended college and received good grades, this ruling was reversed, and he was ordered to stand trial.
See also
- List of criminal competencies
- Wilford Berry, Jr.Wilford Berry, Jr.Wilford Lee Berry, Jr. , known as "The Volunteer" because he was the first convict to waive his right to appeal his death sentence after Ohio reinstated the death penalty, was executed by lethal injection...
- Aileen WuornosAileen WuornosAileen Carol Wuornos was an American serial killer who killed seven men in Florida in 1989 and 1990, claiming they raped or attempted to rape her while she was working as a prostitute...
- Hippocratic OathHippocratic OathThe Hippocratic Oath is an oath historically taken by physicians and other healthcare professionals swearing to practice medicine ethically. It is widely believed to have been written by Hippocrates, often regarded as the father of western medicine, or by one of his students. The oath is written in...