ipl-logo

Competency To Stand Trial Essay

1862 Words8 Pages

Competency to stand trial (CST) is determined by medical experts who are given the power to determine whether defendants are rationally able to participate in court proceedings. However, the possible infringements of rights are largely dependent on the opinions of an expert who is only deemed reliable and accurate based on their status as an “expert”. This essay will argue that the use of expert witnesses is ineffective as a means to determine competency and is also a risk to individual constitutional rights. The essay will outline the roles of the expert witness and the contributions of their opinions towards determining CST. However, there are complications with the nature of the use of an expert, as it may infringe on the defendants right …show more content…

The expert is often asked to give their experienced opinion on hypothetical questions related to the case, based on the facts presented. However, the “hearsay rule” designates that they were not allowed to disclose information that was obtained outside of court (Johnston and Sartwelle 2013). Other than this rule that governs all court processes, there are few regulations regarding the expert’s testimony. As long as the opinions of the experts were relevant and reliable in the realm of the expert’s field, it would be acceptable (Johnston and Sartwelle 2013). As a result, expert witness controls great power in the court room. Also, since, modern values of medicine and science has led to the dominance of everyday life, the role of an expert witness seems natural and justified (Rogers and Shuman 2005, Chap 3). This is documented in studies where they have found that there are more than 80% of civil cases where expert witnesses are incorporated in the judicial process (Johnston and Sartwelle 2013). With the power that expert witnesses command in court, and the lack of regulation of how their opinions can be applied, it can compromise the due process initiatives of the

Show More
Related

Truman Capote's Last Ditch Effort To Help Perry In In Cold Blood

527 Words | 3 Pages

During the trial, the doctor who analyzed Perry’s sanity, Dr. Jones, testified his opinion: “‘From your conversations and examination of Perry Edward Smith, do you have an opinion as to whether he knew right from wrong at the time of the offense involved in this action?’... Answer yes or no, do you have an opinion?’ ‘No’” (Capote 296). He then follows this up with a lengthy and detailed description of how the Doctor would have defended his response had he been allowed by the prosecution to elaborate.

Read More

New Jersey Vs Cavallo Case Study

645 Words | 3 Pages

Arguments: The State argues that “proffered evidence” of Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony is irrelevant because Cavallo may have committed rape on this specific encounter regardless if he does not possess rapist characteristics. The defendants argue that the reliability of scientific expert testimony should determine the importance, not admissibility. Issue: Whether, (1) Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony is relevant as an expert opinion evidence of Cavallo’s character under the ruling of Rule 47? (2) Did Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony satisfy the special limitations on expert evidence under the ruling of Rule 56 (2) and New Jersey case law? (3) Did Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony achieve general acceptance in the scientific community to convince the court that it is reasonably

Read More

What Are The Facts Of Lavallee Court Case

1404 Words | 6 Pages

v Lavallee (1990), expert testimony is admissible if the evidence is relevant to the case, even if it is based on hearsay. Though the appellant did not testify, rule 804 of the Federal Rules of Evidence allows hearsay statements to be considered in the event that the appellant refuses to testify (Matson, 2004). The hearsay evidence assists the expert in determining their opinion, but it is not used as evidence to the existence of the facts. As long as there is some admissible evidence to the expert’s testimony, the jury or judge cannot ignore it – the greater matter is determining how much weight should be given to the testimony. The judge is required to warn the jury of the reliability and credibility of the information, and to determine a weight at which the jury should use to influence their decision regarding the case (Ottawa L. Rev.,

Read More

Keith Cooper Case

938 Words | 4 Pages

Significance for forensic practice a. While Dusky had already established that a defendant has a fundamental right to not be put on trial unless he can satisfy the two-factor requirements to demonstrate competency, this case clarified that states must use a preponderance of the evidence to evaluate competency during a criminal trial and cannot place a clear and convincing burden of proof on the defendant to show that he is incapable to stand trial. b. Summarily, a State may not proceed with a criminal trial after the defendant has demonstrated that he is more likely than not to be incompetent, and cannot demand high level level burden of proof. VII. Discussion a. I agree with this decision. When a state has the liberty to heighten the burden of proof placed on the defendant to prove incompetency, I agree that there is a serious and significant threat that some defendants who are indeed incompetent may be unjustly deemed competent.

Read More

FRE 704 V PA Rules Of Evidence

547 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More

Pros And Cons Of Juries In Australia

1543 Words | 7 Pages

There are many criticisms surrounding, the jury system currently in use in our Australian legal system, these criticisms have recently been brought into the light over the past few years with many cases, such as the Casey Anthony case where a mother was acquitted of murdering her daughter as the jury stated, after less than 11 hours of deliberation, ‘there was not enough evidence’ when the forensic evidence was clearly stacked against her. This lack of competence by the jurors is a criticism that Lord Denning argued about in What Next in the Law? (1982) he debates that the selection of jurors is far too wide, resulting in jurors that are not competent to perform their task. Lord Denning suggested that the jury party should be selected in much the same process as magistrates are, with interviews and references required, although this initiative has several obvious problems, a more complicated selection process would be much more time-consuming and costly to the Australian tax payer; finding sufficient people willing to take part would prove incredibly difficult and a jury that is intelligent and educated can still be biased, and may be more likely to be so if drawn from a narrow social group. For a trial by jury case to be effective, no bias should exist in the jurors judgments, the jurors should understand clearly their role and key legal terms, and the jury system should represent the community as a whole and its standards and views whilst upholding the rights of the accused and society and remain cost and time effective.

Read More

How Does Daubert Impact On Forensic Science

584 Words | 3 Pages

The first and foremost thing which judges must determine is whether a guilty person is enough to qualify by knowledge, experience, training or education to give expert testimony. It implies that a

Read More

Pros And Cons Of The Daubert Standard

1404 Words | 6 Pages

Under the modified Daubert standard, relevant scientific evidence is only admissible if it is centered upon testable hypotheses, conforms with the standard rate of potential errors, has been peer reviewed, and if the method is generally accepted in the scientific community (Hoog, 2008). However, there are three problems with the application of the Daubert standard. Firstly, David E. Bernstein and Jeffrey D. Jackson (2004) proved that there was no uniformity in the application of the standard in the sense that it’s only abided with in a portion of the states, and not necessarily with full adherence. Secondly, since the judge is not a scientist, it is difficult for him/her to, without doubt, determine the full honesty of the experts’ testimonies. An example from the Willingham case would be the two medical experts asserting that he was a sociopath although one was an irrelevant family counselor and the other, known as “Dr. Death” and later expelled from the American Psychiatric Association for ethical violations, had not even spoken to Todd Willingham.

Read More

Overview Of The Queensland Jury Act 1995

1254 Words | 6 Pages

1.0 Introduction Section 80 guarantees the right to trial by jury. The Queensland Jury Act 1995 provides the current legislation which decrees that all trials on indictment must be by jury. In the ninety years since this legislation was passed, an increase of trial complexity has occurred, leaving many jurors with the inability to comprehend the information and evidence procured in a trial. This proceeds to make lay juries ineffective and unreliable. To remedy the situation, specialised juries should be introduced to minimize the amount of incorrect verdicts, misunderstandings in court, jury misconduct, and avoidance of jury duty.

Read More

Ethical Dilemmas When Shadowing My Attorney

1252 Words | 6 Pages

That is the moral ambiguity surrounding the defense of an individual who may be guilty of committing a crime. This paper discusses the ethical dilemma of providing legal representation to clients whose behavior may contradict morality and societal norms, based on my internship experience. Despite this ethical predicament, I will shed light on the importance of legal representation and the significance of attorney-client privilege and due process. During my time shadowing my attorney, two instances arose that made me question the ethical implications of defending an individual who may be guilty of a crime. Without disclosing personal information, I will refer to the defendant as A and the victim as B. The first instance that I experienced was related to an evidentiary hearing, which is a legal proceeding where evidence and legal arguments are presented to a judge for a decision on a disputed issue.

Read More

Nils Christie Essay

773 Words | 4 Pages

Lawyers also decide what is relevant in court, rather than letting parties decide what they believe to be relevant. Because of this, victims lose participation in their own case. Christie also discusses the types of segmentation and their effects on modern law. I agree with Christie’s views of modern law in regards to reduced participation of parties, the presence of too many specialists, and his view on segmentation. I agree with

Read More

Elaboration Likelihood Model Paper

2147 Words | 9 Pages

The confidence you display? The title you hold? These are all questions that a lawyer must take into consideration when he or she puts an expert witness on the stand. This paper will delve into the different elements that make an expert witness influential and persuasive to judges and juries alike, mainly focusing on how important establishing credibility, the Elaboration Likelihood Model’s influential ability, vivid narratives, and how leadership and

Read More

Witness For The Defense Elizabeth Loftus

1447 Words | 6 Pages

She urges jurors to remain skeptical of eyewitness identifications of defendants, and demonstrates how mistakes have been made. This book is built around descriptions of cases in which Loftus has been involved as an expert witness for the defense. The book begins with a brief description

Read More

Examples Of Exceptions To The Rule Of Hearsay

1471 Words | 6 Pages

Hearsay, Hearsay Exceptions, and Hearsay Difficulties Jacob Karko Arizona State University CRJ 321 Professor Andrew Clemency January 28th, 2023 Hearsay, Hearsay Exceptions, and Hearsay Difficulties The purpose of this paper is to explore four topics revolving around hearsay in the court room. The first topic is defining hearsay, what can be considered hearsay and its differences with the standard definition. The second topic will cover what is not hearsay despite being close in relation to hearsay. The third topic is the exceptions to hearsay under rules 8/01 through 807.

Read More

Trial By Jury Advantages And Disadvantages

1472 Words | 6 Pages

This essay will briefly discuss the role of the jury and how it works, from the principle behind it, to the method with which members are selected, and to the powers available to jurors. Moreover, it will outline advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury, and it will point out a couple of ways which could ameliorate this type of trial. Trial by jury has been a part of the criminal justice system since the 12th century (Davies, 2015), it is considered an ancient right and a symbol of liberty (Hostettler, 2004). It creates no precedent and it can decide challenging cases equitably without making bad law, it also brings members of the public into the administration of justice and into an understanding of legal and human rights (Hostettler,

Read More

More about Competency To Stand Trial Essay

Related Topics

Open Document