Ads
related to: landmark forensic psychology casesthechicagoschool.edu has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
O'Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court in mental health law ruling that a state cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by themselves or with the help of willing and responsible family members or friends.
Forensic psychology involves both elements of basic as well as applied work. Forensic psychologists may hold a PhD or Psy.D. in clinical psychology, counseling psychology, social psychology, organizational psychology, school psychology, or experimental psychology under accredited institutions. [27]
BOR, 14th. 1975. Drope v. Missouri. When deciding whether to evaluate a criminal defendant's competency, the court must consider any evidence suggestive of mental illness, even one factor alone in some circumstances. Therefore, the threshold for obtaining a competency evaluation is low.
Mosk. Dissent. Clark, joined by McComb. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 17 Cal. 3d 425, 551 P.2d 334, 131 Cal. Rptr. 14 (Cal. 1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of California held that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient.
Dusky v. United States. Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court affirmed a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial. [1] The Court outlined the basic standards for determining competency.
Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983), is a United States Supreme Court case. [1] The Court ruled on the admissibility of clinical opinions given by two psychiatrists hired by the prosecution in answer to hypothetical questions regarding the defendant's future dangerousness and the likelihood that he would present a continuing threat to society in this Texas death penalty case.
United States. Paula J. Frendak v. United States. Frendak v. United States, 408 A.2d 364 (D.C. 1979) is a landmark case in which District of Columbia Court of Appeals decided that a judge could not impose an insanity defense over the defendant 's objections.
Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003), is a decision in which the United States Supreme Court imposed stringent limits on the right of a lower court to order the forcible administration of antipsychotic medication to a criminal defendant who had been determined to be incompetent to stand trial for the sole purpose of making them competent and able to be tried.