Competency to be Tried, Imprisoned, and Executed: The Role of Mental Illness in Criminal Trials / Edition 1

by Jane Moriarty

Overview

Whether the accused is competent to stand trial, whether the plaintiff is competent to accuse, or whether a witness is competent to testify has had a long legal history. Such questions draw legal reasoning into areas of ethical reflection and scientific debate deeply rooted in the moral history of the United States. Mental competence has come to play a central and controversial role in proving guilt, and in evaluating the severity of a crime and its corresponding punishment. This compendium brings together the major legal precedents and legal commentaries that have defined the role of mental illness in criminal trials throughout U.S. history. The reprint collection considers, among other issues, the evolution of the Supreme Court's position on the insanity defense and mental retardation, how these affect one's competency to stand trial or be executed, and how these affect culpability and punishment. Each volume begins with an introductory essay, and includes both cases and commentary. Scholars as well as students will find these volumes a useful research tool.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780815340645
Publisher:	Taylor & Francis
Publication date:	10/19/2001
Series:	Controversies in Constitutional Law Series , #3
Pages:	384
Product dimensions:	6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 1.10(d)

About the Author

Jane Moriarty is Visiting Associate Professor at the University of Akron School of Law, Akron Ohio. She is author of Psychological and Scientific Evidence in Criminal Trials (Clark Boardman Callaghan, 1996), which is updated annually, and editor of Women and the Law (West Group, 1998). She has written a number of articles dealing with law, evidence, and expert witnesses.

Table of Contents

Dusky v. United States , 362 U.S. 402 (1960). Pate v. Robinson , 383 U.S. 375 (1966). Drope v. Missouri , 420 U.S. 162 (1975). Ford v. Wainwright , 477 U.S. 399 (1986). Penry v. Lynaugh , 492 U.S. 302 (1989). Washington v. Harper , 494 U.S. 210 (1990). Riggins v. Nevada , 504 U.S. 127 (1992). Louisiana v. Perry , 610 So.2d 746 (1992). Foucha v. Louisiana , 504 U.S. 71 (1992). Cooper v. Oklahoma , 517 U.S. 348 (1996). Arrigo, Bruce A. and Christopher R. Williams. Law, Ideology, and Critical Inquiry: The Case of Treatment Refusal for Incompetent Prisoners Awaiting Execution, New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement 25 (1999).