How are the mentally disabled treated in court cases trails? To answer this question, I found two articles that relate to this topic. One of the two articles entitled “In the public Interest: Intellectual Disability, the Supreme Court, and the Death Penalty” targets a specific death penalty court case where the attorney for the defendant did not effectively provide evidence to show that the defendant was viewed as mentally disabled according to the law. This topic is relevant to my topic because it shows how careless attorneys are when fighting for a mentally disabled person’s life. The second article “Reforming Incompetency to stand trial and plead guilty” discuss the issue of the importance of reforming he incompetency doctrine. This topic is relevant to the question at hand, because the doctrine allows people who a mentally disabled to be protected in law. These two sources are alike in many ways, one being they both want to protect the rights of a mentally disabled people. Although they have a similar objective they go about obtaining it in different ways. The first article wants to show misrepresentation by the attorney of a specific case to show that if an attorney has any doubt that the person is mentally ill then they need to be evaluated for treatment, because according to the law any mentally disabled person …show more content…
I would use these two articles because one states what the law has already put in place, but needs some revising, therefore it points out the flaws in our court system. The other article is useful, because it highlights the flaws in the training and effectiveness of attorneys when it comes down to dealing with mentally disabled clients. In order to completely answer this research question, I need to find out how judges and prosecutors treat mentally disabled defendant. I also need to research what defines someone as being mentally disabled according to the
The second clause of the intellectual disabilities standard regards to the conceptional skills of daily life. The three areas noted by the CCA to make a diagnosis are conceptual, social, and practical skills. The petitioner, Bobby James Moore’s accusation is that the CCA used his deficits against his strengths. During evaluations the defendant’s deficits and strengths are both considered to establish if the defendant has limitations or not. Because the petitioner’s claim that Atkins needs legal determinations rather than a medical diagnosis, there is no need to discuss the Moore’s strengths.
Before the court can evaluate the specific details of this section, they must first re-define what a mental disorder is based on case laws. There are three crucial cases which contributed in shaping the definition of a mental disorder: Cooper v. R., R. v. Bouchard-Lebrun, and R. v. Stone cases. In Cooper v. R. (1980), Justice Dickson defines disease of the mind— also known as mental disorder— as the following: ...“[D]isease of the mind” embraces any illness, disorder or abnormal condition which impairs the human mind and its functioning… [where of] such intensity as to render the accused incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the violent act or of knowing that it is
A mental health expert in a criminal trial may offer an opinion on the ultimate legal issue of whether the defendant did or did not have a mental state or condition that constitutes an element of the crime charged or of a defense PA rules of evidence adopted the FRE 704(A) which states that an opinion is not objectionable just because it embraces an ultimate issue. (704(a)). PA rules of evidence does not adopt FRE 704B. However, PA courts have ruled that expert testimony, which concerns a defendant's mental capacity to form the type of specific intent a conviction for murder of the first degree requires, significantly advance the inquiry as to the presence or absence of an essential element of the crime, resulting in relevant testimony. (Commonwealth v. Walzack). In this criminal case a mental health expert is prepared to offer an opinion on the whether the defendant was insane at the time of the offense.
In the case of Moore v. Texas, “the Supreme Court will face the question of whether it is a violation of the Eighth Amendment to use outdated medical standards in assessing intellectual disabilities to determine whether an individual may be executed.” This really stood out to me, to think that he committed the act of a murder in 1980, when he took the life of a grocery store clerk and they are questioning if he should face the consequences that he was given. In my opinion if you chose to take the life of any individual you must pay for your actions, I feel that many people use “intellectual disability” as a way to avoid being put to death. I do agree many people have mental sickness such as “schizophrenia, bipolar disorders etc” but if you
Conferring to Anderson, & Hewitt, (2002), “individuals who show clinically significant improvement in general psychopathology are more likely to be perceived as restored to competency.” However, 50% of people who are diagnosed with mental retardation or acquired cognitive deficits are not restored; such mental disorders render the suspect irresponsive to the required court
The basis of the appeal and review is on whether the defendant 's sentencing was based on racially discriminatory testimony given by a psychologist during his trial. This paper will focus on the United States Supreme Court case Buck vs. Stevens and the constitutional
Lessard has a right to know why she was attained. Secondly the court found that Wisconsin had violated Ms. Lessard rights by not given her adequate notice of all her rights, including the right to have a jury by trial is required by law, and thirdly it is unconstitutional to hold someone for forty eight hours without a hearing and detention longer than two week with a full hearing was also unconstitutional (Remington, 1973). Another finding was that everyone has a right to counsel when it comes to civil commitment, and that hearsay evidence cannot be admitted in a civil commitment and that if a person is given a psychiatric evaluation it cannot be used against them. (Remington, 1973) both mentally ill and a danger to others, a person cannot be held without less restrictive alternatives which simply mean that a person who is mental ill do not have to put away if they have not committed no crimes (Remington, 1973).at all need to be held
In Roper v. Simmons there are two issues that must be addressed, the first being the issue of moral maturity and culpability. The defense in the trial phase of this case argued that Mr. Simmons was an at an age where he was not responsible enough to fully understand the effects and consequences of his actions. The majority draws on Atkins v. Virginia to argue that this specific precedent supports their case that the death penalty should not be imposed on the mentally immature or impaired. However, an important point to be made is that the Atkins v. Virginia decision is geared towards the clinical definition of mental retardation: significant limitations that limit adaptive skills. Also, another important question to consider is the competency and premeditation of Mr. Simmons’ crime in this case.
Mentally ill prisoners in prison should be well taken care of. These offender need more care than those without a mental illness due to the illness they have they could hurting innocents civilian and guards or other prisoners like themselves or even themselves. Mentally ill offender need more medicines, Improve conditions, and the cost to keep them. Medicines Mentally ill offenders need as much more medicine than inmates without a mental illness,
9, pg. 229). The article I summarized claims that even though there has been a mighty change in the system it was not designed to meet the complicated needs of mentally ill inmates in their care (The New York Times Editorial Board). Both the article and the textbook state the needs of the mentally ill inmates are difficult and expensive and their needs are not always met. The text claims the correctional officers have other needs and the article says the system needs further improvement to fully meet the needs of the mentally ill. It would seem that regardless of if it is a systematic issue that needs to be resolved or a change that needs to happen on a personnel level, both sources clearly state there needs to be changes in effect in order to house these types of inmates properly and
In Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the court ruled that the mentally retarded should not be tried for death penalty because they do not bear the proper guilt that even the worst adult criminal bears upon committing a crime. The mentally retarded have trouble reasoning and controlling their
The document also put forward the proposition that the mentally ill can improve and become useful members of society, and that the convicts and the insane should not be kept in the same
When it comes to the case Miller V. State, I believe that trial court refused to give the jury instructions regarding the insanity defense, which the defendant wished to have comunicated, because they wanted the jury to be able to decide imoartially. Miller was examined by three medical experts and they concluded that Miller satisfied the M'naughten insanity test when he stabbed Goring. The district court had instructed the jury to determine whether Miller was actually legally insane when he stabbed Goring. They wanted the jury to find proof of insanity at that time, and to also consider Miller's mental condition "before and after the killing to throw light on what Miller's mental condition was at the time of the killing" (Schmalleger
When you look out at the world today; it won’t take you long to point out all the tragic and horrific things that are occurring daily which include: terrorism, the current refugee situation, genocide, poverty, and mass murders among many others tragedies. Currently in the world today, people desperately need more love than hate, more compassion than judgment, more grace than harshness, and more justice than inequity. These qualities are important (love, compassion, grace) in order to making a difference in the world today, but I want to focus on justice and how it affects people with disabilities. The online English-Oxford Dictionary defines justice as, “a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people” I do not agree with this definition entirely; I believe the word justice is more accurately defined as, “respect and compassion for all people no matter what situation they are in.” I have not had any personal experience with the criminal justice system, but I have seen a beautiful picture of my definition of justice unfold in my freshman physical education class back
Disabled people are people who have mental or physical limitation so they depend on someone to support them in doing their daily life needs and jobs. Although disabled people are a minority and they are normally ignored, they are still a part of the society. The statistics show that the proportion of disabled people in the world rose from 10 percent in the seventies of the last century to 15 percent so far. The number of handicapped exceeds a billion people all over the world, occupied about 15 percent of the world's population, as a result of an aging population and the increase in chronic conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, blood and psychological diseases that are related with disabilities and impairments. Every five seconds someone