Board exam Flashcards
1
Q
Hierarchy of Authority: Constitution trumps?
A
Statues.
2
Q
Hierarchy of Authority: Constitution trumps statues, statues trump?
A
Court decisions.
3
Q
Definition of dicta?
A
Portions of court opinions that go beyond the facts. They are not binding in subsequent cases.
4
Q
Is dicta binding in subsequent cases?
A
NO. Dicta = Portions of court opinions that go beyond the facts. They are not binding in subsequent cases.
5
Q
Matters of Fact are determined by who?
A
Trier of fact (jury or judge if jury is waived).
6
Q
Definition of “matter of law?”
A
Whatever is to be decided by the application of statutory rules or the principles of law.
7
Q
Matter of law is decided by who?
A
Judge. Whatever is to be decided by the application of statutory rules or the principles of law.
8
Q
Definition of “demurrer?”
A
Court dismissals - no cause of action
9
Q
A judge’s decision to dismiss a civil action as a matter of law without a trial because there is no genuine issue of material fact.
A
Summary judgement.
10
Q
The appellate courts distinguish between what types of errors?
A
Harmless vs reversible.
11
Q
Writ challenging whether a prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
A
Habeas corpus
12
Q
Definition of habeas corpus.
A
Writ challenging whether a prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
13
Q
Standard of proof: Civil commitment?
A
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
14
Q
Standard of proof: Termination of parental rights?
A
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
15
Q
Standard of proof: Competence to end life support?
A
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
16
Q
Standard of proof: Deportation; denaturalization?
A
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
17
Q
Standard of proof: 75%
A
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
18
Q
Standard of proof: 51%
A
Preponderance of the evidence
19
Q
Standard of proof: over 90%
A
Beyond a reasonable doubt
20
Q
Standard of Proof: Probable cause?
A
<50%
Reasonable belief
Objective standard
21
Q
Standard of Proof: Reason to believe?
A
Honest belief, subjective standard
22
Q
1st amendment?
A
Freedom of speech
23
Q
Freedom of speech. Amendment?
A
1st
24
Q
5th amendment?
A
Right not to incriminate self.
25
Right not to incriminate self. Amendment?
5th
26
6th amendment?
Assistance of counsel.
27
Assistance of counsel. Amendment?
6th
28
14th amendment? (2 parts)
Due process and equal protection
29
Due process and equal protection. Amendment?
14th
30
8th amendment?
Cruel and unusual punishment.
31
Cruel and unusual punishment. Amendment?
8th
32
14th amendment. Due process is divided into 2 parts. What are they?
Substantive and procedural.
33
Matthews v. Eldridge, 1976. Found?
Due process protections must balance.
34
Matthews v. Eldridge, 1976, found that due process protections must balance. Why? (3)
1) private interest at stake
2) risk of error in procedure
3) governmental interests
35
Every person who, under color of any state statute, subjects any citizen to the deprivation of any rights secured by the Constitution shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law.
42 U.S.C. 1983
36
Which landmark cases fall under 42 U.S.C. 1983?
```
Rogers v. Commissioner
O'Connor v Donaldson
Zinermon v. Birch
Estelle v. Gamble
Lessard v. Schimdt
```
37
Define subpoena duces tecum.
Command to appear and bring all specified records.
38
2 components of a crime?
1) actus reus (forbidden act)
| 2) mens rea (guilty intent)
39
4 types of mens rea (guilty intent):
1) purposely
2) knowingly
3) recklessly
4) negligently
40
Mens rea (guilty intent): actor consciously disregarded the risk. Type?
Recklessly
41
Mens rea (guilty intent): actor should have been aware of the risk.
Negligently
42
List types of affirmative defenses (5)
1) self defense
2) duress
3) entrapment
4) insanity
5) necessity
43
Which three types of law fall under "quasi-criminal" (to rehabilitate)?
1) Civil commitment
2) juvenile delinquency
3) sexually violent predators
44
Legal citation (3)
1) volume #
2) name of periodical
3) page number
45
What is the term for a motion that is the equivalent in civil cases to the motion in arrest of judgment in criminal cases. It may be made after the jury's decision is announced but before a judgment is entered. This motion asks the judge to enter a judgment for the losing party despite the decision of the jury.
A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (N.O.V.)
46
What term means "may you have the body?"
Habeas corpus. This name is given to a variety of writs to bring a party before a court or judge. The primary function of the writ is to release someone from unlawful imprisonment.
47
Does habeas corpus address a prisoner's guilty or innocence?
NO. only whether the prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
48
Habeas corpus addresses what?
Whether the prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
49
Standard of proof of such character than an ordinary person would be willing to rely and act upon it in the most important of his own affairs.
Beyond reasonable doubt.
50
In civil actions in which monetary interests alone are in controversy, the plaintiff must show that the factual propositions are more likely than not. Standard of proof?
A preponderance of the evidence.
51
If a civil action involves a more important social interest, such as civil commitment, in which personal liberty is at stake, what is the standard of proof?
Clear and convincing.
52
What standard of proof is used to report child abuse?
Reason to believe (subjective standard that is extremely low).
Immunity is provided as long as the reporting person had a genuine belief based in good faith.
53
Due process is guaranteed to federal defendants through which amendment?
5th
54
Due process is guaranteed to state defendants through which amendment?
14th
55
Which amendment provides for "right to assistance of counsel?"
6th
56
"Similarly situated classes must be treated similarly." Amendment?
14th - equal protections.
57
14th amendment, due process, what type demands "fundamental fairness?"
Substantive due process.
58
The determination of what process is due requires a careful assessment of competing interests. Which case?
Matthews v Eldridge (1976) USC.
59
In Matthews v. Eldridge (1976), the USC identified 3 factors to determine procedural due process, 14th amendment. What are they?
1) private interest affected by the government actions
2) risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used as well as the probable value of the added procedural.
3) Government's interest and the extent to which it will be impeded by the use of additional safeguards.
60
The balancing test from Matthews v Eldridge (determination of what process is due) was used in which landmark cases? (5)
1) Addington v Texas
2) Parham v JL and JR
3) Ake v Oklahoma
4) Santosky v Kramer
5) Washington v Harper
61
The right for privacy is derived from which amendments? (5)
```
1st
3rd
4th
5th
9th
```
62
42 USC 1983 refers to what?
Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
63
What landmark cases were filed under 42 USC 1983 (Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights)? (4)
Lessard v Schmidt
O'Connor v Donaldson
Rogers v Commissioner
Estelle v Gamble
64
What is a tort?
A civil wrong
65
Define tort law.
An effort to make the injured party whole again, usually through the means of financial restitution.
66
Define intentional tort.
Acts done with the prior knowledge by the wrong-doer that damage may result.
67
What are two examples of intentional torts? (Acts done with the prior knowledge by the wrong-doer that damage may result.)
1) Assault
| 2) Battery
68
Intentional tort: Acts done with the prior knowledge by the wrong-doer that damage may result. What is an example of an intentional tort in psychiatry? (4)
1) false imprisonment
2) violate civil right
3) sex with patients
4) defamation of character
69
What is another word for an unintentional tort?
Negligence: bx which causes an unreasonable risk of causing harm. Professional negligence by an MD is called malpractice.
70
What are the 4 D's of negligence?
1) DUTY
2) DERELICTION or breach of duty
3) The breach of duty must be a DIRECT cause of the damage
4) There must be actual DAMAGES that result from the breach of duty
71
Define respondiat superior.
Doctors may be held liable for acts of their employees.
72
When the defendant is "aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result." What type of mens rea is this?
Knowingly
73
What two things are required for "specific intent" for mens rea - negligently?
1) Not criminal unless by statute
| 2) No intent to do harm
74
What three things are required for "general intent" for mens rea - recklessly?
1) Not criminal unless by statute
2) No intent to do harm
3) unreasonable to be unaware
75
For affirmative defenses (self-defense, duress, insanity, automatism, entrapment, necessity) - the burden of proof falls on who?
Defendant
76
Can you use an affirmative defense like duress for murder?
NO
77
Stranded in the snow, must break into vacant cabin to survive - what defense could you use?
Necessity (affirmative defense)
78
Legal citations are in the following order: (3)
Volume #, name of periodical, page number
79
Standard of proof in civil trials?
Preponderance of the evidence
80
Amendment in Ford v Wainwright?
8th
81
Which type of dismissal by a court is for insufficient cause for action?
Demurrer
82
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): the plaintiff must show the following elements:
1) the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly
2) the conduct was extreme and outrageous
3) the conduct caused the plaintiff's emotional distress
4) the emotional distress was severe
83
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): what is the standard?
The objective standard: what a reasonable person would find objectionable
84
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (NIED): explain.
One has legal duty to use reasonable care to avoid causing emotional distress to another individual. Accidental infliction, if negligent, is sufficient to support claim.
85
In Mitchell v Rochester Railway, the court denied recovery to a plaintiff who suffered a miscarriage due to fright after the defendant lost control of his horse drawn carriage. She was not physically injured. Rule?
Impact Rule.
This rule has been modified by various jurisdictions over the years. In some jurisdictions, a personal injury is not required but only some type of physical impact or touching.
86
Define "zone of danger" rule.
A person cannot recover damages unless he or she was within the "zone of danger" during the same accident - so close that he/she was at high risk of physical impact, causing him to be afraid for his own safety. In most states, the person that the plaintiff witnessed harmed in the zone of danger must be a relative.
87
The "foreseeability" or "relative bystander" test was first recognized in what California SC case?
Dillon v. Legg
88
In Dillon v Legg (CA SC) - what test was first recognized?
"Foreseeability" or "relative bystander" test
89
"foreseeability" or "relative bystander" test held that individuals could sustain damages outside the zone of danger if the following three things were true:
1) Plaintiff was located near the scene
2) Shock resulted from a direct emotional impact
3) Plaintiff and victim were closely related.
90
In workers comp cases the worker must show that he or she has suffered an injury or disability that affects what?
Earning power.
91
Workers comp case: burden of proof?
Claimant
92
Workers comp case: standard of proof?
Preponderance of the evidence
93
Example of physical mental claim in a workers comp case:
Rape at work leads to PTSD
94
Example of mental physical claim in a workers comp case:
A long period of emotional strain at work leads to a heart attack
95
In a workers comp case is fault needed?
No (in tort law YES!)
96
Cognitive malingering. When a malingerer tries too hard and misses simple items. Ex: which has four legs, a human or a dog? Strategy?
Floor effect strategy
97
Floor effect strategy for cognitive malingering. What two tests can you use (when a malingerer tries to hard and misses basic questions)?
1) Rey 1 memory test
| 2) b test (evaluee is asked to circle lower case b from various letters
98
Concerns about the Rey 1 memory test for cognitive malingering?
no single cut off score for malingering and lacks consistent administration guidelines
99
Symptom validity testing for malingering: presentation of a set of stimuli followed by a forced-choice recognition test. Make sure you provide feedback on accuracy of the choice! Two tests you can use?
Coin in hand test
| TOMM
100
In a workers comp case the injury at the worksite must arise "by accident"
TRUE. The injury must be due to an unanticipated event that occurs at the work site.
101
Recognition memory is better or worse than recall memory with feigned memory loss?
WORSE
102
VRAG, HCR-20, COVR - which structured instrument is actuarial?
VRAG (violence risk appraisal guide)
103
What type of delusions are more likely to be acted on than any other type of delusion?
Persecutory
104
What is the single best predictor of future violence?
Past violence
105
What type of violence is the hallmark of psychopathic character?
Predatory, dangerous b/c there are no bxs that foreshadow it.
106
Child was hit by driver, mother brought wrongful death action against driver seeking damages for emotional injuries she sustained from witnessing the death. Case?
Dillon v. Legg
107
Child was hit by driver, mother brought wrongful death action against driver seeking damages for emotional injuries she sustained from witnessing the death. Court?
CA SC (Dillon v. Legg)
108
Holding in Dillon v. Legg?
Expanded the zone of danger to foreseeability test (injury was reasonably foreseeable).
1) injured party at the scene of the event
2) experience a direct emotional impact by witnessing it
3) closely related to victim
109
In this case, the hx of recovery for negligent infliction of emotional damages (NIED) is reviewed.
Dillon v. Legg (CA SC)
110
Foreseeability standard? Landmark case?
Dillon v. Legg (CA SC)
111
Activity limitations and/or participation restrictions in an individual with a health condition, disorder, or disease.
Disability.
112
A significant deviation, loss, or loss of use of any body structure or body function, in an individual with a health condition, disorder, or disease.
Impairment.
113
Consensus-derived percentage estimate of loss of activity reflecting severity for a given health condition and the degree of associated limitations in terms of ADLs.
Impairment rating.
114
Pays benefits to workers who have qualified for coverage (usually by working) and who have become disabled.
SSDI (Social security disability insurance).
115
A social welfare program designed to provide income support for people who have become disabled regardless of whether they have ever worked.
SSI (Supplemental Security Income).
116
ADA covers what substance use disorders?
alcohol dependence. Those with a drug dependence are protected only if they are in tx for the addiction or have completed a tx program and are not currently using illegal drugs.
Individuals addicted to drugs or alcohol are excluded from ADA protection if their condition poses a direct threat of harm to others or themselves.
117
Does ADA offer protection for personality disorders?
YES.
118
Disability: What is the name for those basic activities that the average person in the general population can perform with little to no difficulty.
Major life activities.
119
Major life activities: those basic activities that the average person in the general population can perform with little to no difficulty. Is reproduction a major life activity?
YES
120
Dentist told plaintiff that he would fill her cavity in the hospital and she would have to pay hospital costs because she was HIV+. Case?
Bragdon v Abbott, USSC, 1998.
121
Bragdon v Abbott, USSC, 1998: Dentist told plaintiff that he would fill her cavity in the hospital and she would have to pay hospital costs because she was HIV+. Issue?
Is HIV a disability covered by the ADA. YES, asymptomatic HIV limiteds one of plaintiff's major life functions (reproduction).
122
Bragdon v Abbott, USSC, 1998: Dentist told plaintiff that he would fill her cavity in the hospital and she would have to pay hospital costs because she was HIV+. Holding?
On remand the district court affirmed previous grant of summary judgement in favor of the plaintiff. D/t universal precautions in dentistry, HIV did not pose a "direct threat" to the dentist.
123
What are the facts in Olmstead v. LC?
LC was dx'd with schizophrenia. She was hospitalized and eventually her tx team concluded that she could be transitioned to a community-based program. LC sued the state regarding their failure to place her in a community based program.
124
Issue: Whether the ADA Title II proscription of discrimination may require placement of persons with mental disabilities in community settings rather than institutions. Case?
Olmstead v. LC, USSC, 1999
125
What is the holding in Olmstead v. LC?
If a state can provide a community based alternative at no more cost, it must do so.
126
Based on needs determination: SSI or SSDI?
SSI
127
Administered by the Social Security Administration: SSI or SSDI?
Both
128
History of contributions via FICA: SSI or SSDI?
SSDI
129
Work-related injury: SSI or SSDI?
Neither
130
Minimum income: SSI or SSDI?
SSI
131
Which of the following disorders is not listed as a qualifying disorder under Social Security: personality disorder, ID, ASD, substance addiction disorders, sleep disorders?
Sleep disorders
132
The case of school board v Arline has has had a significant influence on cases involving?
HIV
133
In essence Olmstead v LC addresses?
community placement
134
What % of persons evaluated for disability are malingering?
30%
135
Voluntary production or exaggeration of sxs in pursuit of an easily identified goal.
Malingering.
136
Voluntary production of sxs to assume "patient" role and is not otherwise understandable in view of the individual's environmental circumstances.
Factitious disorder.
137
What is more common in schizophrenia - AH or VH?
AH 66%
138
Individual who has been formally judged, by the judicial system, both guilty of a crime and emotionally disturbed This category DOES NOT include those prisoners whose mental illness has not been formally recognized by the courts.
Mentally Disordered Offender (MDO)
139
Parole is defined as a period of conditional supervised release following what?
A prison term.
140
The most common type of correctional facility?
Lockup - local confinement facility that constitutes the initial phase of the criminal justice process. The average stay is < 48 hrs.
141
Fastest growing prison population?
Women
142
There are __x more individuals with SMI in prisons and jails than in state psychiatric hospitals.
10
143
Most common dx in both male and female offenders in a correctional setting?
Substance use
144
In which correctional setting is suicide most prevalenc?
Lockup suicides are much greater than jail or prison suicides.
145
Most common method of suicide in correctional facilities?
Hanging.
146
Leading cause of local jail inmate deaths?
Suicide
147
Age at highest risk for jail suicide?
Bimodal distribution. < 18 and > 55.
148
Who is more likely to die by suicide in jail - violent offenders or drug offenders?
Violent offenders were 5x more likely to commit suicide than drug offenders.
149
Ganser Syndrome?
Cluster of sxs seen in prisoners:
1) Approximate answers (2+2=5)
2) Clouding of consciousness
3) Somatic conversion (sensory sxs)
4) Hallucinations
Malingering v factitious disorder vs dissociative disorder
Sxs often follow a severe stress and are brief in duration with subsequent amnesia
150
Do individuals with ID have a constitutional right to rehabilitation in prison?
NO
151
What is the most important service element in correctional mental health?
Screening
152
The APA Task Force notes that in jails and prisons, three basic services that should be provided are:
1) screening, referral and evaluation
2) tx
3) community re-entry
153
A civil wrong arising from a claim by one party that another party has negligently, maliciously, or deliberately inflicted some sort of injury on him or her.
A tort
154
Because a tort action seeks only damages, it is filed in which court?
State, unless it involves a federal institution.
155
What actions are brought by inmates who have exhausted state remedies and feel some constitutional issue exists to challenge their conviction or loss of good time credits.
Habeas corpus actions.
156
State prison inmates can sue for violations under what?
ADA
157
Tony Goodman, a paraplegic inmate in a Georgia prion, filed a pro se complaint challenging the conditions of his confinement. Case?
US v Georgia (USSC)
158
Issue: Can a disabled inmate in a state prison sue the State for money damages under Title II of the ADA of 1990? Case?
US v Georgia (USSC)
159
US v Georgia (USSC). Holding?
Inmates can sue the State for money damages under Title II of the ADA for conduct found to violate the 14th amendment.
160
US v Georgia (USSC): Inmates can sue the State for money damages under Title II of the ADA for conduct found to violate which amendment?
14th
161
ADA and direct threat?
Program access is not required when it poses a direct threat to the heath or safety of others.
162
Expanded the court's ability to sua sponte (on its own) dismiss prisoner's civil complaints.
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PRLA)
163
Does not allow a prisoner to bring legal action under section 1983 until available administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PRLA)
164
The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PRLA) amended the Federal Tort Claims Act to require what to establish the presence of an emotional injury?
A documented physical injury.
165
____ has been interpreted by courts as the constitutional standard regarding the tx of pretrial detainees.
The due process clause of the 14th amendment.
166
The standard governing conditions for pretrial detainees states that a pretrial detainee cannot be subjected to conditions or restrictions that are not reasonably related to a legitimate governmental purpose.
Bell test.
167
Pretrial detainees have ______ not be be punished, while convicted inmates have an 8th amendment right not to be punished in a cruel and unusual manner.
a due process right.
168
Turner test is related to what amendment?
1st amendment
169
Turner test is applied when?
In determining whether a regulation violated a prisoner's constitutional rights.
170
Turner test determines whether a regulation violated a prisoner's constitutional rights. A four-prong test for "reasonableness" was created:
1) Valid, rational connection between the prison regulation and the government's legitimate interest?
2) Are there alternative means open to the inmate to exercise that right?
3) What impact will accommodation of the asserted right have on other inmates and prison personnel
4) The absence of ready alternatives will be taken as evidence of reasonableness.
171
What amendment has served as the origin for the right to treatment for prisoners?
8th Amendment
172
The 8th Amendment gives who in the correctional system a constitutional right to medical care?
CONVICTED prisoners
173
Which landmark case set the standard for provision of medical care in the incarcerated population?
Estelle v Gamble, USSC, 1976
174
In Estelle v Gamble, Mr. Gamble, a prison inmate, sustained a back injury when a bale of cotton fell on him while he was working in a prison assignment. He filed what type of claim that he received inadequate medical tx and his civil rights were violated?
42 USC Section 1983
The USSC held that Mr. Gamble's case failed to establish a 42 USC Section 1983 claim, medical malpractice does not equal a constitutional violation.
175
The USSC set the "deliberate indifference" standard in outlining the conditions under which lack of care would violate the 8th Amendment. Case?
Estelle v Gamble, USSC, 1976
176
Deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of prisoners constitutes the "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain" by the 8th Amendment. Case?
Estelle v Gamble, USSC, 1976
No definition by the SC has been provided for serious medical needs.
177
When a person knows and is aware of a situation, which he/she disregards.
Subjective recklessness.
178
When a person knows and is aware of a situation, which he/she disregards.
Subjective (criminal) recklessness.
179
Which landmark case clarified the mens rea required for the establishment of deliberate indifference?
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994
180
Which landmark case clarified the mens rea required for the establishment of deliberate indifference?
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994
Subjective/criminal recklessness
181
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994. Details of case?
Dee Farmer was a pre-operative transsexual imprisoned after being found guilty of credit card fraud. He was beaten/raped in prison and filed a suit against prison officials that they were "deliberately indifferent" to the likelihood that his "feminine characteristics" would result in such an attack.
182
The Court held that a prison official may be held liable under the 8th amendment for acting with "deliberate indifference" to inmate's health or safety only if he knows that inmates face a substantial risk of serious harm and disregards that risk by failing to take reasonable measures to abate it. Case?
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994
183
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994 - clarified the mens rea required for the establishment of deliberate indifference?
Subjective/criminal recklessness
184
Landmark case that examined under what conditions antipsychotic medications could be administered against an inmate's will.
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990
185
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990: Mr. Harper filed Section 1983 suit claiming what?
That his SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS (14th amendment) had been violated when antipsychotic medications had been given against his will.
186
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990: Does not apply when?
When correctional authorities forcibly medicate a prisoner during an emergency, for medical reasons (I.e. not to punish), and the administration is of limited duration.
187
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990 does not require what three things?
1) Consideration of less intrusive means
2) Decisional incompetence
3) Judicial decision before the forcible medication
188
Landmark case that examined the issue regarding the commitment procedures required to keep a prisoner in a psychiatric hospital at the end of his criminal sentence.
Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960
189
While serving time in a NY Prison for an assault charge, the pt was transferred to the State Hospital as "insane." At the conclusion of his prison sentence, he was certified as requiring further psychiatric care and held at the State Hospital. He filed a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS and requested a transfer to a civil hospital. Case?
Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960
190
Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960: While serving time in a NY Prison for an assault charge, Baxstrom was transferred to the State Hospital as "insane." At the conclusion of his prison sentence, he was certified as requiring further psychiatric care and held at the State Hospital. He filed a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS and requested a transfer to a civil hospital. USSC holding?
Held that his 14th Amendment, equal protection rights were violated because
1) he was not granted a jury review that was available to all other persons civilly committed in NY.
2) there had been no determination by a civil mental hospital of his dangerousness to others.
191
Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960: While serving time in a NY Prison for an assault charge, Baxstrom was transferred to the State Hospital as "insane." At the conclusion of his prison sentence, he was certified as requiring further psychiatric care and held at the State Hospital. He filed a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS and requested a transfer to a civil hospital. Held that his 14th Amendment, equal protection rights were violated because? (2)
1) he was not granted a jury review that was available to all other persons civilly committed in NY.
2) there had been no determination by a civil mental hospital of his dangerousness to others (they had been held b/c of "dangerous or criminal propensities").
192
Describe "Operation Baxstrom."
Following Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960 decision, many patients who had been held in a hospital for the "criminally insane" were released.
Over a period of 5 yrs, only 2.7% of 967 pts required recommitment = high false positives d/t psychiatrist's tendency to be on the safe side and the inherent difficulty of prediction.
193
Supreme Court case which addressed if a prisoner's due process rights were violated when transferred from prison to psychiatric hospital w/o an administrative hearing.
Vitek v Jones, USSC, 1980.
194
Vitek v Jones, USSC, 1980. Which arm of the 14th Amendment?
Due process clause
195
Vitek v Jones, USSC, 1980. Procedural safeguards outlined by the Federal District Court were upheld by the SC. The safeguards included:
1) adequate notice
2) adversary hearing
3) written findings
4) availability of legal counsel.
196
Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960. Which arm of the 14th Amendment?
Equal protection clause.
197
Vitek v Jones, USSC, 1980. Facts?
Mr. Jones set fire to his mattress and burned himself. He was eventually transferred to a psychiatric state hospital after a prison mental health official made a finding of mental illness and the prison director recommended the transfer.
USSC held that the involuntary transfer of a prisoner to a mental hospital impinges on a liberty protected by the due process clause of the 14th amendment.
198
Vitek v Jones, USSC, 1980. The court referred to commitment as a "massive curtailment of liberty" which subjected a prisoner to:
1) stigma of psychiatric hospitalization
| 2) bx modification programs
199
Farmer v Brennan established what as the mens rea for deliberate indifference?
subjective recklessness
200
In which landmark case did the USSC state that an inmate's equal protection rights were violated?
Baxstrom v Herald
201
What is the most common dx among inmates?
Drug/alcohol abuse or dependence
202
What principle governs the tx of pretrial detainees regarding medical care?
Due process
203
When are jail suicides most likely to occur?
Evenly distributed from the first few days of confinement to over several months of confinement.
204
Which act increased the ability of the court to dismiss claims filed by prisoners?
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
205
Which act stated that an inmate who files more than three frivolous lawsuits is barred from filing free lawsuits in the future.
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
206
Which Standards offer accreditation regarding care provided in a correctional facility? (3)
NCCHC
JCAHO
ACA
207
Which landmark case provided guidelines of planning mental health services in a correctional facility?
Ruiz v Estelle
208
Which landmark case set guidelines regarding the transfer of an inmate from a correctional facility to a psychiatric facility?
Vitek v Jones
209
A prisoner receives a book on satanic cults and rituals. The correctional officer takes it away. The prisoner files a claim that his first amendment rights had been violated. What would the court say?
The court would find that the prisoner's rights were not violated if the officer's bx was reasonably related to legitimate penological interests.
210
Define special master.
An individual appointed in prison condition cases to oversee court mandated remedial measures.
211
Which act established a mechanism for collecting filing-fee payments from prisoners unable to pay the full filing fee.
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
212
Which act discourages consent decrees (a judicial decree that sanctions a voluntary agreement between parties in dispute) when a prisoner files a claim about prison conditions.
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
213
Which act delineates the role of special masters?
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
214
Which act prevents a court rom awarding attorney's fees to plaintiff's counsel in settled cases absent a violation of federal law.
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
215
In which case did the USSC hold that state prisons fall squarely w/in Title II's statutory definition of "public entity."
Pennsylvania v Yeskey
216
What is the most important service element in correctional settings?
Screening
217
The sign considered pathognomonic for Ganser syndrome?
Approximate answers (2+2=5)
218
The National Commission on Correctional Health Care has noted that correctional staff should follow what guidelines when treating transgender patients?
Follow standards by professionals with expertise in transgender health when determining what tx is warranted.
219
Estelle v Gamble - did the prison staff demonstrate deliberate indifference?
No, the Court held that the prison’s treatment of Gamble did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
the prison MD saw Mr. Gamble on 17 occasions during a three month span and treated is back injury, HTN, and heart problems. The failure to perform an x-ray or to use additional diagnostic techniques does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, at most , malpractice.
220
Civil law generally calls a person reckless who acts or fails to act in the face of a "very substantial unjustifiable" risk of harm that is either known or so obvious that it should be known. Standard?
Objective standard.
221
Criminal law generally permits a finding of recklessness only when a person disregards a "substantial unjustified" risk of harm of which he is aware.
subjective standard
222
Court of Appeals routinely equated deliberate indifference to?
Recklessness
223
An inmate challenged the state statue permitting the transfer of prisoners to a mental hospital when there was a medical finding of mental illness and inability to receive proper tx in a penal complex. Case?
Vitek v Jones.
224
Which landmark case dealt with due process rights of sex offenders?
Specht v Patterson
225
Which landmark case dealt with due process rights of persons found incompetent to stand trial?
Jackson v. Indiana
226
Farmer v Brennan. Is Farmer entitled to damages or an injunction against various federal prison officials responsible for transferring her to, or assigning Farmer within, a prison facility where Farmer was sexually assaulted by another inmate? Decision?
Maybe. Court vacated the lower court judgment and remanded. The Supreme Court held that prison officials may be liable if they showed “deliberate indifference” to a substantial risk of serious harm when the official was subjectively aware of the risk and disregarded it. The Court remanded the case for further consideration of whether prison officials were aware of the risk to Farmer.
227
McKune v Lile, USSC, 2002, facts?
Lile was convicted of rape, sodomy, and kidnapping of a HS girl. A few yrs prior to his release he was ordered to participate in a Sexual Abuse Tx Program (SATP). Participants are required to sign an "admission of Responsibility" form and to complete a sexual hx form detailing all prior sexual offenses. Inmates are then required to take a polygraph to verify accuracy of their sexual history. The information was not privileged and the info could be used against the inmate in future proceedings. If he didn't participate he would lose privileges and be transferred to a max security facility. Mr. Lile refused to participate based on 5th amendment right.
228
Does Sexual Abuse Tx Program (SATP) and the consequences for non-participation in it create a compulsion that violates a sex offender's 5th Amendment right to avoid self incrimination? Case?
McKune v Lile, USSC, 2002
229
McKune v Lile, USSC, 2002. Holding?
Sexual Abuse Tx Program (SATP) serves a vital penological purpose and offering inmates minimal incentives to participate does not amt to compelled self-incrimination prohibited by the 5th Amendment. The loss of certain privileges that make an inmate's life more tolerable does not equate with compelled self-incrimination.
230
US v Georgia, USSC, 2006. Facts?
Paraplegic inmate filed a pro se complaint challenging the conditions of his confinement. Cell was too small to navigate wheelchair, no accommodations, and no tx. He brought claims under 42 USC 1983 and Title II of the ADA.
231
Issue: Can a disabled inmate in a state prison sue the State for money damages under Title II of the ADA? Case?
US v Georgia, USSC, 2006.
232
US v Georgia, USSC, 2006. Holding?
Inmates may sue the State for money damages under Title II of the ADA for conduct found to violate the 1th Amendment. (8th amendment is applied to the states by the 14th amendment).
233
The Court ruled that Title II abrogates sovereign immunity in cases where violations of the 8th Amendment are alleged. Case?
US v Georgia, USSC, 2006.
234
Explain abrogation doctrine.
Constitutional law doctrine expounding when and how Congress may waive a state's Sovereign immunity and subject it to lawsuits that to which the state has not consented... the ADA specifically notes that a State shall not be immune from an action in Federal or State court that violates that ADA (US v Georgia, USSC, 2006.).
235
This case allows inmates to sue under Title II for money damages in state court and prevents States from claiming sovereign immunity against such claims when constitutional violations of an inmate's 14th amendment rights have been demonstrated.
US v Georgia, USSC, 2006.
236
Issue: Did a 3-judge court order to reduce prison overcrowding in CA violate the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA). Case?
Brown v Plata, USSC, 2011
237
Brown v Plata, USSC, 2011. Holding?
The court-mandated population limit is necessary to prevent violation of prisoners' 8th Amendment rights and is authorized by the PLRA.
238
Brown v Plata, USSC, 2011. CA appealed why?
3-judge court erred w/out affording more time to comply with prior orders in Coleman and PLata and in ruling that overcrowding was the primary cause of constitutional violations.
239
Rouse v Cameron, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1966. Facts?
Mr. Rouse was involuntarily committed in 1962 to St. E's in DC after he was found NGRI (misdemeanor for which max imprisonment is 1 yr). Filed a HABEAS CORPUS petition contending that he had received no tx.
240
In what case did the court (DC Circuit Court of Appeals,) recognized a right to tx for the first time?
Rouse v Cameron, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1966.
241
In which case did the Court articulate the concept of individualized treatment plans?
Rouse v Cameron, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1966.
242
Wyatt v Stickney, Alabama Trial Court, 1971. Facts?
Hospital i Alabama was going to layoff personnel, which triggered a wide-ranging investigation of the deplorable conditions at the institution. The judge emphasized that the failure to provide suitable and adequate tx to the mentally ill cannot be justified by lack of staff or facilities.
243
The quid pro quo theory involved the provision of tx in exchange for the pt's loss of freedom. Case?
Wyatt v Stickney, Alabama Trial Court, 1971.
244
In Wyatt v Stickney, Alabama Trial Court, 1971 the Court found that the tx program was deficient in what three areas?
1) a humane psychological and physical environment
2) qualified staff in numbers sufficient to administer adequate tx (QMHP's)
3) IEPs
245
In Wyatt v Stickney, Alabama Trial Court, 1971 what does a humane psychological and physical environment require?
right to privacy and dignity, right to least restrictive conditions, not deemed incompetent solely by reason of hospital admission, right to visitation, right to be free from excessive medication, right not to be part of research...
246
The confinement must bear some relationship to the purpose of commitment, which is tx. Case?
Jackson v. Indiana
247
In this case the Court stated that there is no constitutional basis for confining persons involuntarily if they are dangerous to no one and can live safely in freedom.
O'Connor v. Donaldson, USSC, 1975
O'Connor was the MD, Donaldson was civilly committed to a state hospital for 14.5 yrs with minimal tx (he refused meds and ECT for schizophrenia).
248
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982. Facts?
Mr. Romeo was a mentally retarded in a state hospital. He suffered 63 injuries in a 2 yr period. His mom filed suit under the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964. She alleged that Mr. Romeo had a constitutional right to safe conditions of confinement, freedom from bodily restraint, and a right to training or habilitation.
249
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982. Holding?
Mr. Romeo did have constitutionally protected liberty interests under the due process clause of the 14th amendment.
250
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982. Mr. Romeo did have constitutionally protected liberty interests b/c of what amendment?
Under the due process clause of the 14th amendment.
251
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982. Mr. Romeo did have constitutionally protected liberty interests under the due process clause of the 14th amendment to: (3)
1) reasonably safe conditions
2) freedom from unreasonable body restraints
3) such minimally adequate training as reasonable may be required to accomplish the first two interests.
252
This model of addressing tx refusal focuses on the tx needs of the patient.
Treatment/needs-driven model.
253
Rennie v Klein, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983. Facts?
Mr. Rennie sued in federal district court to enjoin the hospital from administering medication to him absent an emergency. Mr. Rennie had become homicidal and to keep Mr. Rennie from harming other patients, staff administered prolixin decanoate.
The DoMH guidelines noted that a refusing patient (who had not been found legally incompetent), was entitled to a review of his case by the tx team and then if he still refused by the medical director or designee.
254
Rennie v Klein, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983. Model?
Treatment/needs-driven model.
255
Rennie v Klein, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983. The USSC remanded this case to the Third Circuit with what instructions?
Reconsider their decision in light of recent Youngberg v Romeo decision.
Their decision: upheld the existence of a qualified constitutional right to refuse tx and the concept that the least restrictive alt concept applied to the choice of medications. The 3rd circuit ruled that the state's administrative policy was constitutionally sufficient and a due process hearing was not required.
256
Rennie v Klein, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983. Holding?
3rd Circuit reaffirmed that there was a qualified right to refuse tx and the administrative policy made adequate provision for the exercise of that right.
Using the language from Youngberg v Romeo, tx should be based on "accepted professional judgement: and therefore ruled that psychiatrists should be free to make tx decisions on that basis.
257
An involuntarily committed legally competent pt who refuses medication has a right to a professional medical review of the treating psychiatrist's decision of what is in the best interest of the patient. The decision-making process is left to the medical professionals judgement. Case?
Rennie v Klein, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983.
258
This model of addressing tx refusal focuses on rights of the patient to refuse tx.
"Rights driven" model
259
Rogers v Commissioner, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1983. Holding?
A judge, not a guardian, makes the decision whether an incompetent patient should be treatment, based on "substituted judgement."
260
Rogers v Commissioner, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 1983. The court outlined 6 factors the judge should consider when evaluating the right to refuse tx under the substituted judgement principle:
1) ward's expressed preferences regarding the tx
2) ward's religious beliefs
3) impact on ward's family
4) possibility of side effects
5) prognosis w/out tx
6) prognosis w/ tx
261
Under this model, the court must find the person incompetent for decision-making as a condition for commitment.
Utah model
262
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Facts?
Mr. Harper was in the Washington prison system. He had a hx of becoming violent when not on his antipsychotic medication. He was transferred to the Special Offender Center (SOC) where he was forced to take medications under the institutions policy. This policy consisted of a 3-person panel that included a psychiatrist, psychologist, and administrator. A majority was required to determine that the inmate needed involuntary medications and the psychiatrist had to be in the majority. Mr. Harper filed a Section 1983 suit claiming that his procedural and substantive due process rights had been violated.
263
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Mr. Harper filed a Section 1983 suit claiming what?
That his procedural and substantive due process rights had been violated (14th Amendment) when antipsychotic medications had been given against his will under the Washington SOC.
264
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Mr. Harper was in the Washington prison system. He had a hx of becoming violent when not on his antipsychotic medication. He was transferred to the Special Offender Center (SOC) where he was forced to take medications under the institutions policy. This policy consisted of a 3-person panel that included a psychiatrist, psychologist, and administrator. A majority was required to determine that the inmate needed involuntary medications and the psychiatrist had to be in the majority. Mr. Harper filed a Section 1983 suit claiming that his procedural and substantive due process rights had been violated. Holding?
Upheld the institutional policy that allowed an internal administrative review panel, rather than a judicial hearing, to determine if an inmate could be involuntarily medicated.
265
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Mr. Harper was in the Washington prison system. He had a hx of becoming violent when not on his antipsychotic medication. He was transferred to the Special Offender Center (SOC) where he was forced to take medications under the institutions policy. This policy consisted of a 3-person panel that included a psychiatrist, psychologist, and administrator. A majority was required to determine that the inmate needed involuntary medications and the psychiatrist had to be in the majority. Mr. Harper filed a Section 1983 suit claiming that his procedural and substantive due process rights had been violated. The USSC upheld the institutional policy that allowed an internal administrative review panel, rather than a judicial hearing, to determine if an inmate could be involuntarily medicated. What test did the USSC apply?
The Turner test and observed that the prison policy governing the involuntary administration of antipsychotic drugs would be constitutional as long as it was "reasonably related to legitimate penological interests."
According to the test, a prison regulation is constitutional if it satisfies four factors:
1) There is a rational connection to a legitimate government interest;
2) There are alternative means for prisoners to exercise their right(s);
3) Accommodation of the right(s) would have excessive "ripple effects"; and
4) There are no "ready alternatives."
266
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. Facts?
Dr. Sell was charged with Medicaid fraud and later charged with attempting to murder the FBI agent who arrested him. Sell was found incompetent to stand trial. Dx'd with delusional disorder, he refused antipsychotic medication. A Court of Appeals ruled that the government's interest in restoring Sell's competency was serious enough to override his significant liberty interest in refusing antipsychotic medications.
267
Issue: Does the Constitution permit the government to administer antipsychotic drugs involuntarily to a mentally ill criminal defendant to render the defendant competent to stand trial for serious, but non-violent offenses. Case?
Sell v US, USSC, 2003.
268
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. Holding?
Medication to restore trial competency for serious offenses could be administered involuntarily under certain required circumstances:
1) important government interest is at stake
2) medication significantly furthers the state's interests
3) Medication must be substantially likely to render the defendant competent to stand trial and substantially unlikely to have side effects that will interfere with the defendant's ability to assist with counsel.
4) less intrusive txs are not available
5) medication must be medically appropriate defined as "in the pt's best medical interest in light of his medical condition."
269
How is State v Perry different from Washington v Harper?
Harper was medicated involuntarily d/t DTO, Louisiana SC found that Perry could not be medicated to restore competency for execution.
270
State v Perry, Louisiana Supreme Court, 1992. Details?
Perry was convicted and sentenced to death for murdering five family members. While awaiting execution he became psychotic. The trial court found him incompetent and ordered that he be medicated to restore competency.... Louisiana SC found that an inmate could not be medicated to restore competency for execution.
271
Who first proposed a constitutional protected right to tx in the U.S.?
Morton Birnbaum
272
In Youngberg v Romeo, Mr. Romeo had a constitutionally protected right to what? (3)
1) reasonably safe conditions of confinement
2) to freedom from unreasonable body restraints
3) to such minimally adequate training as reasonable to have safe conditions of confinement and freedom from unreasonably body restraints.
273
In judicial reviews of tx refusals, tx refusals on average last for how many days prior to a judicial override?
13 days
274
In Rouse v Cameron, DC Court of Appeals, 1966. Mr. Rouse (found NGRI) petitioned for his release on a writ of habeas corpus on the grounds that he was receiving no tx. The lower court denied the petition stating that the only issue was recovery of sanity, not tx. Rouse appealed. What did the appeals court rule?
Reversed and remanded to assess the adequacy of tx. Rouse has a right to tx since treatment is the purpose of involuntary hospitalization. This reasoning is also applied to post-NGRI hospitalization.
275
First significant right to treat case?
Rouse v Cameron.
276
The holding in this case noted that institutional staff may not justify continued failure to provide adequate tx on the basis of inadequate facilities or lack of staff.
Rouse v Cameron, DC Court of Appeals, 1966.
277
In this landmark case the court set out minimum constitutional requirements for adequate tx in the appendix of the opinion. The court added that failure to comply could not be justified by a lack of operating funds. Case?
Wyatt v Stickney, U.S. District Court, Alabama, 1972
278
Wyatt v Stickney, U.S. District Court, Alabama, 1972. Minimum standard of tx (3)?
1) humane psychological and physical environment
2) qualified staff in numbers sufficient to administer adequate tx
3) Individualized tx plans
279
In O'Connor v DOnaldson (1975), did the USSC accept the quid pro quo theory?
NO
280
In Youngberg v Romeo, the holding noted that Mr. Romeo did have a constitutionally protected liberty interests under what Amendment?
Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment
281
First USSC decision that directly addressed the question of whether tx and habilitation are constitutional imperatives.
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982
282
In this case the USSC stated, "courts should not second-guess the expert administrators on matters on which they are better informed (regarding tx). A decision made by a professional would be presumptively valid." The Court held that liability may be imposed only when a decision is "such a substantial departure from accepted professional judgement." (this is higher than the standard applied to malpractice suits)The Court held that professional will not be individually liable if they were unable to satisfy normal professional standards b/ of budgetary constraints.
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982
283
Which case ensures that only egregious cases are likely to be filed regarding tx?
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982.
"Professional judgement" rule.
284
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, 1973. Facts?
Mr. Lewis was charged with murder and rape of a student nurse while he was confined at a state hospital. He had not been convicted of the crime. He and his parents gave consent for his participation in a study for "sexual psychopaths." surgery of the limbic system vs antiandrogen tx. An attorney filed suit stating that Mr. Smith and others were being illegally detained for the purpose of experimental psychosurgery.
285
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, 1973. Holding?
1) Mr. Smith's detention was unconstitutional b/c he had not had a "sexual psychopath" hearing or a determination of guilt
2) A person involuntarily detained in a state facility (or their guardian) cannot give legally adequate consent to an innovative or experimental surgical procedure on the brain (if the surgery was widely accepted in the field, such as for a brain tumor, then consent can be valid.
286
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, 1973. Amendment?
The 1st Amendment protects the freedom to express ideas and it necessarily follows that he must protect freedom to generate ideas.
287
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, 1973. The 1st Amendment protects the freedom to express ideas and it necessarily follows that he must protect freedom to generate ideas. This foreshadowed the argument in what right to refuse tx case?
Rogers v Commissioner.
288
This case had a chilling effect on prison research.
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, 1973.
289
In their second opinion (this case) the Third Circuit of Appeals held that antipsychotic drugs may be administered to an involuntarily committed mentally ill patient whenever, in the exercise of professional judgement, such an action is deemed necessary to prevent the pt from endangering himself or others.
Rennie v Klein, 3rd circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, 1983.
290
Rennie v Klein is the second opinion from the same set of facts. What is the difference between the first and second opinion?
In its first opinion, the 3rd circuit court of appeals used a "least intrusive means" test, wherein medications could be forced in non-emergency situations on patients who had never been found incompetent, only if such tx represented the least restrictive tx available. In the second opinion they used the :professional judgement" rule based on Youngberg v Romeo.
291
Rogers v Commissioner, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1983. A committed patient is competent until judicially found incompetent. A judge, using a full adversarial hearing, then decides, using what model, what the incompetent pt would have wanted if competent.
Substituted judgement model
292
Rogers v Commissioner, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1983. What is the role of the patient's guardian?
Monitor the tx plan and pt's continuing incompetence - NOT as the pt's decision maker.
293
What is the difference between Rennie v Klein and Rogers v Commissioner?
Both recognize a constitutional right to refuse tx, but they differ in how much due process is required?
294
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Harper filed a Section 1983 action claiming that his civil rights were being violated by getting forced antipsychotic medications. The trial court rejected his claim but the Washington State Supreme Court reversed. The State Supreme Court held that the state could not administer antipsychotic medications to a competent non-consenting inmate unless there was a judicial hearing. The USSC reversed and agreed with the trial court. What model was the State Supreme Court referring to?
Rogers model.
295
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. The Court held that the existing policy comported with what requirement since it is reasonably related to the state's legitimate interest in combating the danger posed by a violent, mentally ill inmate.
substantive due process requirement.
The substantive due process issue is what factual circumstances must exist before the State may administer antipsychotic drugs to a prisoner against his will.
296
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Explain why the policies and administrative hearing procedures comported with adequate procedural due process?
The due process clause does not require a judicial hearing. Harper's liberty interest, when considered with the government interests involved and the efficacy of the particular procedural requirements, is adequately protected by allowing medication decisions to be mad my medical professionals rather than a judge.
297
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990. Holding suggests that the USSC prefers which model Rennie or Rogers when overriding tx refusals of hospitalized patients?
Rennie.
| Washington v harper only addresses prisoners
298
Riggins v Nevada, USSC, 1992. Facts?
Mr. Riggins challenged his murder and robbery convictions on the ground that the State of Nevada unconstitutionally forced him to take Mellaril during his trial. He pled NGRI and was convicted/sentenced to death.
299
Riggins v Nevada, USSC, 1992. The forced administration of antipsychotics during Riggins trial violated which two amendment rights?
6th (right to a speedy and public trial,)
14th. A pretrial detainee has an interest in avoiding involuntary administration of antipsychotics drugs that is protected under the due process clause. Under Harper (1990) forcing an antipsychotic on a convicted prisoner is impermissible, absent a finding a overriding justification and the determination of medical appropriateness. The 14th Amendment affords at least as much protection to pretrial detainees.
300
Riggins v Nevada, USSC, 1992. How could Nevada have satisfied due process?
If the prosecution had demonstrated that antipsychotic tx was medically appropriate and considering less intrusive alternatives, essential for the sake of Riggins own safety or the safety of others.
301
APA amicus brief "by administering medication, the state may be creating a prejudicial negative demeanor in the defendant - making him nervous, restless, unfeeling, or unresponsive. Case?
Riggins v Nevada, USSC, 1992.
302
Issue: Does the Constitution permit the Government to administer antipsychotic drugs involuntarily to a mentally ill criminal defendant in order to render the defendant competent to stand trial for serious, but nonviolent offenses. Case?
Sell v US, USSC, 2003
303
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. Before administering involuntary medication to restore trial competence, the government should look to alternative grounds for forced medication such as?
Dangerousness or competence to consent to medication.
304
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. The Court cited 2 previous landmark cases, whih ones?
Washington v Harper - due process clause permits involuntary administration of antipsychotics to an inmate with SMI if the inmate is dangerous and the tx is in the inmate's medical interest.
Riggins v Nevada - the USSC in dicta suggested that involuntary medication to restore competence to stand trial could be constitutionally permissible if adjudication of the charges could not be achieved by less intrusive means.
305
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. The trial court must find that all of the following conditions are satisfied:
1) an important government interest is at stake
2) the medication must significantly further the state's interests
3) medication must be necessary to further state interests and less intrusive means of administration must be considered
4) mediation must be medically appropriate (in the pt's best medical interest)
306
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. Sell pled guilty with what type of plea?
Alford plea (pleading guilty while protesting one's innocence).
307
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of health, USSC, 1990. Facts?
Nancy Cruzan lost control of her car and had a severe accident. For 6 yrs she was in a vegetative state w/o significant cognitive function. Hospital employees refused without court approval to honor the request of Cruzan's parents to terminate her artificial nutrition and hydration. Court approved based on roommates testimony that Cruzan said she wouldn't have wanted to life life as a vegetable.
308
Pt lost control of her car and had a severe accident. For 6 yrs she was in a vegetative state w/o significant cognitive function. Parents wanted to stop medical intervention.
Issue: Whether pt's parents has a right under the US Constitution to direct the withdrawal of life sustaining tx, and if so, whether a state may require a clear and convincing standard of proof that withdrawal of tx is what the patient would have wanted.
Case?
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of health, USSC, 1990.
309
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of health, USSC, 1990. Holding?
US Constitution does not forbid Missouri from requiring that evidence of an incompetent's wishes as to withdrawal of life-sustaining tx be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
310
Which case decided the standard of proof for termination of life?
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of health, USSC, 1990.
311
Application of President and Directors of Georgetown College, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1964. Facts?
Mrs. Jones Jehovah's Witness had an acute gastrointestinal bleed, refused blood transfusion, was going to die. Court of appeals judge ordered that the transfusion be given. The patient requested that the appeals court rehear the case. The court denied that patient's appeal.
312
Most common form of reported abuse?
Neglect (~75%)
313
What age group has the highest victimization rate for child abuse?
0-1
314
The focus of termination of a parental right evaluation is what?
Parenting capacity.
315
In Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982, the SC ruled that what standard of proof must be used for termination of parents right?
Clear and convincing evidence
316
Child witness testimony - define reliability.
Reflects the accuracy of a child's statement.
317
Child witness testimony - reliability, assess what two things?
Memory and suggestibility
318
Reporting a memory requires three components:
1) Encoding the experience (creating the memory)
2) Storing the memory
3) Retrieving the memory
319
Memory error - error of omission.
Failure to recall or endorse an event that actually occurred.
320
Memory error - error of commission.
Endorsement of having experienced something that did not occur.
321
Memory error - error of commission. In children this could be d/t misattribution. Explain.
Children have been shown to have difficulty distinguishing between actual and imagined events (actions they performed and actions they imagined performing).
322
The least complex form of memory-the present comparison of a single stimulus as the one previously seen. Children as young as age 3 are very reliable for such single stimulus taskas as basic identification of objects. Type of memory?
Recognition memory.
323
Omission errors are more common in _____, but commission errors are generally rare and do not differ with age.
Preschoolers.
324
The degree to which children's encoding, storage, retrieval, and reporting of events can be influenced by a range of social and psychological factors.
Suggestibility.
325
McMartin factors (5)
1) leading questions (introducing new info into the interview, did he touch your bottom?)
2) Asked and answered (repeating a question the child already answered, suggest to child they gave the wrong answer)
3) Inviting speculation (let's figure out what happened)
4) Other people - interviewer tells child they already received the information from someone else
5) Positive consequences - indicate to the child they will get praise/approval if they give a statement.
326
Child witness testimony - Manny Morales Study. Take away?
Social influence and reinforcement = more powerful determinants of children's answers than simple suggestive questions.
327
Child witness testimony - Manny Morales Study. What % of the children interviewed with McMartin techniques made false accusations within 5 minutes of poor questioning techniques?
58%
328
Child witness testimony - suggestive interviewing techniques can result in false beliefs, which can be long lasting. True or False?
True.
329
Define credibility.
Believability of witness testimony.
330
The landmark article that identified the "Battered Child Syndrome" was written by?
Dr. Henry Kempe
331
A federal statue passed in 1980 that requires states to make reasonable efforts to prevent removal of maltreated children from parental custody.
Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act
332
A federal statue that requires that a permanency plan be made within 12 months of a child's entry into foster care and also sets rules on the termination of parental rights.
Adoption and Safe Families Act
333
A federal statue that created the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect.
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
334
Most common type of child physical abuse injury?
skin injuries
335
Child abuse perpetrators - % women and men?
54.1% women
| 45% men
336
Rule? A child's answers to a police officer's questions about alleged abuse is likely to be determined by a court as testimonial in nature.
Crawford rule.
337
Case? The California Supreme Court held that physicians were expected to diagnose child abuse.
Landeros v Flood.
338
Case? The USSC held that the DSS's failure to provide Joshua with adequate protection against his father's violence did not violate his rights under the substantive due process clause of the 14th Amendment.
Deshaney v Winnebago County DSS
339
The standard of proof required for termination of parental rights is:
Clear and convincing
340
What rule abolished the special requirement that children be shown competent to testify.
601
341
Landeros v Flood, California Supreme Court, 1976. Holding?
Physicians are expected to dx battered children.
342
In what case what the general standard for medical malpractice given?
Landeros v Flood, California Supreme Court, 1976.
343
In both of these California cases the intervening criminal act did not preclude liability.
1) Landeros v Flood, California Supreme Court, 1976. (mother was charged criminally, Dr. Flood was still liable for not dx'ing battered child syndrome)
2) Tarasoff, reporter still liable.
344
DeShaney v Winnebago County DSS, USSC, 1989. What Amendment was in question?
Child lived with his father after parent's divorce, he was beaten by his father and left with permanent brain damage. CPS made various steps to protect child but did not remove him from his father's custody. Mother alleged CPS violated the child's right under substantive due process clause of the 14th amendment - failing to protect him against his father's violence.
345
DeShaney v Winnebago County DSS, USSC, 1989. Holding?
The Dept of Social Services failure to provide the child with adequate protection against his father;s violence did not violate his rights under the substantive component of the due process clause.
.. the state may have been aware of the dangers the child faced, but it played no part in their creation, nor did it do anything to render him more vulnerable to them.
346
People v Stritzinger, California SC, 1983. What two things were erroneously admitted at trial?
1) Dr. Walker's testimony about his conversation with the stepfather after the initial report had already been made (did not advise the defendant that he would violate confidence).
2) child's preliminary hearing testimony because the victim's mother's testimony concerning her daughter's mental state was legally insufficient to support a finding of unavailability of the child as a witness (either expert testifies on child's behalf, or child explains why testifying would be harmful). - defendant was denied constitutional right to confront the principal witness (child).
347
The scope of the physician-patient privilege extends to include confidential group psychotherapy sessions where such sessions are an integral and necessary part of the pt's dx and tx. Case?
State of MN v Andring, Supreme Court of MN, 1984
348
Atkins v Virginia, USSC, 2002 Facts?
At the sentencing phase, psychologist said Mr. Atkins had an IQ of 59. He was sentenced to death. He appealed arguing that execution of the mentally retarded violated the 8th Amendment.
349
Atkins v Virginia, USSC, 2002. Holding?
Executions of the mentally retarded are "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the 8th amendment.
Did not follow stare decisis ... changes in standards of decency... states had made changes in the law prohibiting execution of the mentally retarded and the majority of Americans did not support it.
350
Hall v. Florida, USSC, 2014. Facts?
Mr. Hall kidnapped, raped, murdered a pregnant 21 y/o newlywed. Then killed a sheriff's deputy who attempted to apprehend them. He was sentenced to death. He appealed, stating that his IQ was 71 and he was thus mentally retarded. According to Atkins v Virginia, this was against the law. His appeal was denied, Florida cut off for MR was < 70.
351
Hall v. Florida, USSC, 2014. Holding?
Mr. Hall kidnapped, raped, murdered a pregnant 21 y/o newlywed. Then killed a sheriff's deputy who attempted to apprehend them. He was sentenced to death. He appealed, stating that his IQ was 71 and he was thus mentally retarded. According to Atkins v Virginia, this was against the law. His appeal was denied, Florida cut off for MR was < 70.
USSC ruled that Florida's threshold requirements for determining MR were unconstitutional.
352
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005. Facts?
Simmons murdered Shirley Cook, when he was 17 years old. Simmons was sentenced to death.
353
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005. Holding?
The USSC held that the 8th and 14th Amendment forbid imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed.
354
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005. Cited what case as evidence of a national consensus evolving against the death penalty for those less culpable.
Atkins v Virginia, USSC, 2002.
355
What is the national standard for competency to be sentenced?
There is no national standard.
356
Estelle v Smith, USSC, 1981. Facts?
Mr. Smith was convicted of murdering a store clerk and was sentenced to death. Dr. Grigson was court appointed and interviewed Mr. Smith for a competency to stand trial evaluation w/o defense counsel's awareness. Dr. Grigson then testified at Mr. Smith's sentencing hearing and opined that Smith was dangerous. The jury sentenced Mr. Smith to death.
357
Estelle v Smith, USSC, 1981. The USSC held that two rights were violated? What were they?
1) 5th amendment against self-incrimination, he was not advised that he had a right to remain silent and that the information may be used against him at the sentencing phase.
2) 6th amendment: he was interviewed by Dr. Grigson w/out notice to his counsel who could have advised him regarding his participation in the interview.
358
Barefoot v. Estelle, USSC, 1983. Facts?
Mr. Barefoot murdered a police officer in Tx. Dr. Grigson had not evaluated Mr. Barefoot. Based on hypothetical questions posed to him at the sentencing phase, Dr. Grigson testified that there was a "100 and absolute" chance that Mr. Barefoot would "constitute a continuing threat to society." Barefoot appealed challenging the use of hypothetical questions during the sentencing phase. APA brief asserted that research indicates that even under the best conditions psychiatric predictions of long-term future dangerousness are wrong in at least two out of every three cases.
359
Barefoot v. Estelle, USSC, 1983. Holding?
The USSC rejected Barefoot's contention and the APA amicus brief that psychiatrists could not predict violence sufficiently to allow the jury to hear such opinions. No error was found in the use of hypothetical questions to psychiatric witnesses, despite contentions that doctors should not have been permitted to give opinions on the ultimate issue before the jury.
360
Ake v Oklahoma, USSC, 1985. Facts?
Mr. Ake posed as a lost motorist and broke into the Douglass home, murdered parents and wounded kids. He was evaluated and found incompetent, no psychiatrist evaluated criminal responsibility (NGRI?) and he was sentenced to death.
361
Ake v Oklahoma, USSC, 1985. Holding?
Due process requires that the State provide the defendant with "access to a competent psychiatrist who will conduct an appropriate exam and assist in evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense."
When the death penalty is based on the grounds that the defendant presents a danger to society, an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to psychiatric assistance in rebutting that assertion.
362
Payne v. Tennessee, USSC, 1991. Facts?
Mr. Payne murdered a mother and was sentenced to death. At the sentencing phase, the grandmother testified that the son "cries for his mother." Mr. Payne appealed stating that victim impact statements violated his 8th amendment rights.
363
Payne v. Tennessee, USSC, 1991. Holding?
Allows victim impact statements in capital sentencing - does NOT violate the 8th amendment. The defendant has a right to introduce mitigating evidence and the prosecutor should be allowed to show each victim's "uniqueness."
Stare decisis*** previous rulings had said VIS were not allowed.
364
Ford v Wainwright, USSC, 1986. Facts?
Mr. Ford was convicted of murdering a police officer and sentenced to death. While awaiting his death sentence he exhibited sxs of mental illness. 2 defense counsel psychiatrists found him incompetent to be executed. three psychiatrists appointed by the governor found him competent to be executed on the basis of a joint 30 min interview. No adversarial hearing or cross exam of any psychiatrist was permitted nor were the psychiatric reports from the defense accepted.
365
Ford v Wainwright, USSC, 1986. Holding?
USSC reversed and remanded the case on appeal. The majority opinion held that the 8th amendment prohibits the execution of an "insane" person.
366
Panetti v Quarterman, USSC, 2007. Facts?
Mr. Panetti shot and killed his wife's parents in front of his wife and daughter. He had a longstanding hx of mental illness though was found competent to stand trial and competent to represent himself. After he was convicted, sentenced to death, he claimed that his mental illness rendered him incompetent to be executed. On appeal, Mr. Panetti claimed that his mental illness interfered with his "rational understanding" of the state's reasons for executing him, noting that he believed the real reason was to prevent him from preaching the Gospel. The trial court appointed two experts both who said he was malingering. Mr. Panetti requested funds to hire his own mental health expert, the appt of counsel, and a competency hearing. His request was denied. He filed a habeas corpus.
367
Panetti v Quarterman, USSC, 2007. Holding? (2)
1) the state court failed to provide the procedures to which Mr. Panetti was entitled under the Constitution, outlined in Ford - his own psychiatric evaluation, fair hearing.
2) Fifth Circuit employed an improperly restrictive test of competency to be executed when it considered Mr. Panetti's claim of incompetency. The court did not specifically require that a "rational understanding" was necessary for competency to be executed though they opined that it was a mistake not to consider this.
368
```
All of the following cases dealt with psychiatric testimony at the sentencing phase except?
Ake v Oklahoma
Estelle v Smith
Barefoot v Estelle
Ford v Wainwright
```
Ford v Wainwright
369
The 8th Amendment prohibits execution of the insane. Case?
Ford w Wainwright
370
The execution of the mentally retarded is unconstitutional. Case?
Atkins v Virginia
371
Juvenile death penalty violates the 8th amendment. Case?
Roper v Simmons
372
Which case dealt with psychiatrist's ability to predict future dangerousness at capital sentencing hearings based on hypothetical questions?
Barefoot v Estelle
373
The Council of Ethical and Judicial Affairs states what about physicians and executions?
Prohibits attending, observing, or witnessing executions as a physician.
374
In State v Perry, the USSC found that involuntary tx with medication to restore competency to be executed was cruel and unusual punishment. True or False?
False... it was the Louisiana Supreme Court
375
In this case the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that forced medication of a mentally ill inmate under the Harper standard does not violate due process once an execution date has been set. Case?
Singleton v Norris
376
Panetti v Quarterman, USSC, 2007. The USSC cited their prior ruling in which case?
Ford v Wainwright.
377
Panetti v Quarterman, USSC, 2007. The USSC cited their prior ruling in which case?
Ford v Wainwright. The standard in Ford only required a prisoner to be "aware" of the connection between the crime and the punishment, rather than a rational understanding of the punishment.
378
The 8th and 14th amendments forbid imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed. Case?
Roper v Simmons.
379
How should intellectual disability be defined in order to implement the principles and holding in Atkins v Virginia? Case?
Hall v Florida, USSC, 2014
380
Painter v Bannister, Supreme Court of Iowa, 1996. Facts?
Mr. Painter asked for his 7 y/o son's maternal grandparents to take care of his son after his wife was killed in a car accident. After a year, he remarried and requested his son back. The Bannisters refused.
381
Painter v Bannister, Supreme Court of Iowa, 1996. Holding?
The Iowa Supreme Court established that the standard for determining the custody of a child involved the best interests of the child. They awarded the grandparents custody because they were deemed more stable.
382
Standard of poor required for deciding child custody is?
Preponderance of the evidence.
383
This act serves to limit custody jurisdiction to the state where the child has his home or where there are other strong contacts with the child and his family. Act?
Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, 1968
384
Child Custody Models - where did the concept of least detrimental alternative come from?
Controversial approach to custody articulated by Goldstein, Freud, and Solnit (1973) in the book Beyond the Best Interests of the child.
385
Which court established that the standard for determining the custody of a child involved the best interest of the child?
Iowa Supreme Court (Painter v Bannister)
386
Which child custody standard advanced the concept of psychological parent?
The least detrimental alternative standard.
387
In which case did the USSC hold that the Washington State Statue allowing anyone to petition for visitation rights was unconstitutional?
Troxel v Granville
388
The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act authorizes what?
The issuance of federal warrants for unlawful flights to avoid prosecution in parental abduction cases.
389
Painter v Bannister, Supreme Court of Iowa, 1966. Facts?
Mr. Painter had asked maternal grandparents to care for his son after his wife and younger child were killed in an accident. After a year he asked that the grandparents return the son, they refused. Mr. Painter brought a habeas corpus action to regain custody of Mark. It was granted by the trial court, maternal grandparents appealed.
390
Issue: What is the standard to determine custody of a child? Case?
Painter v Bannister, Supreme Court of Iowa, 1966.
391
Painter v Bannister, Supreme Court of Iowa, 1966. Holding?
The trial court was reversed. The standard is the best interests of the child - permanent custody was awarded to the grandparents.
392
Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982. Facts?
3 children were removed from the Santosky house due to neglect and to avoid imminent danger. 5 yrs later the county of social services petitioned for permanent termination of parental rights. The lower court used a standard of preponderance of the evidence. Parents appealed to the USSC.
393
Issue: What is the constitutionally required burden of proof for termination of parental rights? Case?
Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982.
394
Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982. Holding?
The burden of proof is clear and convincing evidence on the state.
395
Title 12 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits what?
Employment discrimination based on sex, race, national origin, and religion.
396
The "reasonable woman" standard was articulated in what case?
Ellison v Brady
397
After Meritor, plaintiffs with hostile environment claims must prove that the harasser's conduct was "unwelcome" and also: (3)
1) severe or pervasive
2) created a hostile or abusive work environment
3) was based on gender
398
The so-called Faragher-Ellerth defense holds that:
An employer may avoid liability by exercising reasonable care to prevent and correct harassing behavior, and showing that plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of the preventive or corrective opportunities.
399
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986. Facts?
Ms. Vinson worked as a teller at Meritor Savings Bank . She was raped and out of fear for losing her job agreed to have sex with her supervisor. The district court said that the sex was voluntary and had nothing to do with her continued employment at the bank and therefore was not the victim of sexual harassment.
400
Issue: (1) Is a claim of "hostile environment" sexual harassment a form of sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act? Case?
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
401
Issue: (2) When should employers be held liable if they lack notification about alleged sexual harassment? Case?
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
402
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986. Holding?
A claim of "hostile environment" SH is actionable under Title VII. The SC left the issue of employer liability to depend upon the circumstances of each case. The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that employers are always liable for sexual harassment by their supervisors.
403
Which case established hostile environment as a valid form of sexual harassment (obviating the need for the claimant to demonstrate a quid pro quo issue)?
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
404
Which case noted that sexual harassment must be sufficiently severe or pervasive "to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment?"
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
405
Which case addressed "welcomeness" in sexual harassment cases?
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
406
Harris v Forklift Systems Inc, USSC, 1993. Facts?
Teresa Harris worked as a manager and was repeatedly harassed by the president of the company, he told her she was a "dumb ass woman." She sued the company after quitting her job, claiming the president had created a hostile work environment due to her gender. The District Court found that the comments did not create an abusive work environment because they were "not so severe as to seriously affect Harris' psychological well being" or lead her to "suffer injury."
407
Issue: What is the definition of a discriminatory "abusive work environment" under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." Case?
Harris v Forklift Systems Inc, USSC, 1993.
408
Harris v Forklift Systems Inc, USSC, 1993. Holding?
To be actionable as "abusive work environment" harassment, the conduct need not seriously affect an employee's psychological well being or lead the plaintiff to suffer injury.
409
For sexual harassment, what does the Meritor standard require?
An objectively hostile or abusive environment plus the victim's subjective perception that the environment is abusive.
410
Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., USSC, 1998. Facts?
Mr. Oncale was working on an oil platform, he was subjected to sex-related, humiliating actions against him - penis placed on neck, soap bar up anus, physically assaulted in sexual manner. He complained with no relief. He quit his job and filed a discrimination complaint.
411
Issue: Whether workplace harassment can violate Title VII's prohibition against "discrimination because of sex: when the harasser and the harassed employee are the same sex. Case?
Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., USSC, 1998.
412
Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., USSC, 1998. Holding?
Sex discrimination consisting of same sex sexual harassment is actionable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
413
Sexual harassment case? Workplace harassment is not automatically sexual discrimination if sexual connotations are used. "The critical issue is whether members of one sex are exposed to disadvantageous terms or conditions of employment to which members of the other sex are not exposed.
Harris v Forklift Systems Inc, USSC, 1993.
414
If the issue of emancipation of a minor is disputed, the burden of proof is on who?
the party wishing to establish emancipation.
415
Examples of when a minor may be considered emancipated include:
1) entering into a marriage
2) military
3) independent living
4) ownership of valuable property (such as a motor vehicle)
416
Define age of consent.
Often refers to age minor can consent to sexual intercourse. It is 16 in many states.
417
Define mature minor.
An individual, who is not fully emancipated, is potentially competent to make certain decisions. Usually must be 15 yrs old. Maturity will be defined differently according to the issue at stake.
418
Research has shown that __ year-olds do not differ significantly from adults in making decisions about hypothetical treatment situations.
14
419
In what case did the USSC (1979) uphold parental authority for psychiatric admission when accompanied by concurring clinical opinion and period review.
Parham v JL and JR
420
In re Gault, USSC, 1967. Facts?
Gault, 15 y/o made prank calls. He was arrested. When taken into custody, no notice was given to his family nor was a warrant served. Gault was committed to training school until age 21. Gault filed a writ of habeas corpus that his 14th amendment due process was violated.
421
In re Gault, USSC, 1967. The USSC held that juveniles have the right to: (4)
1) notice of charges
2) counsel
3) confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses
4) privilege against self-incrimination
422
The case resulting in the criminalization of juvenile court.
In re Gault, USSC, 1967.
423
The standard of proof in all delinquency adjudications should be?
Beyond a reasonable doubt (In re Winship, USSC, 1970)
424
Which act established the :sight and sound separation" clause?
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (1974)
425
What happens in a consent decree in juvenile court?
Probation, dismissal or some other sanction. 44% of cases are handled this way.
426
Define petitioning in the juvenile court.
Recommend the case to proceed further into the juvenile justice system for formal processing. 55% of all delinquency cases.
427
Juvenile court equivalent for being found guilty.
Adjudicated delinquent.
428
Standard of proof for statue offenders in juvenile court?
Beyond a reasonable doubt or a lower standard in some cases (preponderance of the evidence).
429
Diagnosis that is the strongest predictor of juvenile justice involvement?
Conduct disorder.
430
Graham v Florida, USSC, 2010. Facts?
16 y/o Graham attempted to rob a BBQ restaurant in Florida. He was charged with armed burglary w assault or battery, felony with maxx life imprisonment w/o possibility of parole. 6 months later, participated in robbery and tried to flee police. He was sentenced to life without parole.
431
Issue: Does the 8th Amendment permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in prison w/o parole for a non-homicide crime? Case?
Graham v Florida, USSC, 2010.
432
Graham v Florida, USSC, 2010. Holding
8th Amendment does not permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in prison w/o parole for a non-homicide crime.
433
Miller v Alabama, USSC, 2012. Facts?
Miller beat his neighbor and set fire to his trailer. The neighbor died.
434
Issue: Does the 8th amendment permit juvenile offenders to be sentenced to life in prison w/o parole for a homicide crime? Case?
Miller v Alabama, USSC, 2012.
435
Miller v Alabama, USSC, 2012. Holding?
8th Amendment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life w/o possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders. Leaves open the possibility that LWOP could be a sentence when individual factors in an individual homicide case are considered.
436
What is the major right afforded to adults but not juveniles?
Trial by jury.
437
Amendment in In re Gault?
Due process clause of the 14th amendment
438
Board of Education v Rowley, USSC, 1982. Facts?
Amy Rowley was a deaf student, minimal residual hearing, excellent lip reader. She had an IEP with hearing aid, tutor, speech therapy. Her parents insisted that she be provided a qualified sign language interpreter in all classes.
439
Board of Education v Rowley, USSC, 1982. Holding?
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act's requirement of a "free appropriate public education" is satisfied when the state provides personalized instruction with sufficient support services to permit the handicapped child to benefit from the instruction." The Act did not require the provision of a sign language interpreter for Amy.
440
Irving Independent school District v Tatro, USSC, 1984. Facts?
Tatro was born with spina bifida and required catheterization every 3-4 hrs. The school would not provide catheterization services. Parents sued.
441
Irving Independent school District v Tatro, USSC, 1984. Holding? (2)
Catheterization is a "related service" under the Education for All handicapped Children Act. If it is not available the child cannot attend school.
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is inapplicable when relief is available under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act to remedy a denial of educational services.
442
Which case refers to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act?
Irving Independent school District v Tatro, USSC, 1984.
443
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005. Facts?
Simmons murdered Shirley Cook. Convicted and received the death penalty.
444
Issue: Is it permissible under the 8th and 14th amendment to execute a juvenile offender who has committed a capital offense? Case?
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005.
445
In what case did the Missouri Supreme Court challenge the USSC's ruling in Stanford v Kentucky?
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005. Stanford v Kentucky held that the execution of juveniles age 16 and older at the time of the offense did not violate the 8th amendment.
446
Fare v Michael, USSC, 1978. Facts?
Michael was implicated in a murder. He was brought to the police station, read Miranda rights, he asked to see his probation officer, when the police denied his request, he said he would talk without his lawyer present.
447
Issue: Did the juvenile invoke his Miranda rights when he asked to speak with his probation officer thereby rendering the statements and sketches he provided to the police inadmissible in court? Case?
Fare v Michael, USSC, 1978.
448
Fare v Michael, USSC, 1978. Holding?
Based on the totality of the circumstances surrounding the interrogation, Michael voluntarily and knowingly waived his 5th amendment rights and consented to continuing the interrogation.
449
Ethnicity with the lowest rate of suicide?
Black women
450
According to Joiner's Interpersonal Theory of Suicidal Bx, what three things = suicide desire?
1) Thwarted belongingness
2) Perceived burdensomeness
3) Capability
451
High or low levels of CSF 5HIAA have been associated with high lethality suicides?
LOW
452
What percent of inpt suicides were on 1:1 or Q15 min checks?
50%
453
Define beneficence.
Health professionals work for health and welfare of clients
454
Define nonmaleficence.
One should not intentionally inflict harm.
455
The ethical principle that allows for decisions to rest on the greatest good for the greatest number is:
Utilitarianism
456
During an evaluation of mental state at the time of the offense, the defendant refers to you as "doctor" and says that he really appreciates that you are there to help him deal with depression. This phenomenon is called:
Slippage
457
A theory of ethics that requires the balancing of competing factors to achieve an ethically appropriate plan of action has been termed:
Dialectical Principlism.
458
Define dissimulation.
Minimizing sxs or feigning mental health. A prominent concern in FFD evals, where evaluees may minimize problems due to desire to return to work.
459
Most common reason for FFD request.
Impaired work performance.
460
These evaluations seek to compare employee's functional capacity to relevant job requirements.
FFDEs and disability evaluations
461
How is a FFDE different than a disability evaluation?
FFDEs arise from employer's concern about job impairment and workplace safety.
ADA evaluation seeks to determine abilities and reasonable accomodations that allow work, FFDE seeks to determine impairments that preclude work.
462
Most common reasons for FFD referral?
impaired work performance and concerns about future violence.
463
Employers' legal obligations to make a FFDE referral from all of the following: (3)
1) Vicarious liability for employees
2) Company policy addressing workplace safety
3) Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA)
464
What are two ethically problematic scenarios when conducting FFDEs?
1) accepting a forced FFD referral w/o further clarification
| 2) informing the evaluee he is fit for duty at the end of the interview
465
Most workplace violence is due to what?
Nonemployees entering workplace to commit crimes
466
4 domains to consider when assessing a patient's capacity to consent to tx:
1) express a choice
2) understand relevant information
3) appreciate one's current situation and its consequences
4) manipulate information rationally relevant to the decisions at hand
467
The USSC said that the test for competency that must be met is whether the defendant "has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and whether he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him." Case?
Dusky v US
468
Limitation of the Competency Assessment Instrument (CAI)?
Scores are not normed or standardized.
469
Limitations of the Georgia Court Competency Test?
Potentially superficial assessment of the Dusky standard of understanding, many items assess only recognition.
470
Limitations of the Competence Assessment for Standing Trial for Defendants with MR (CAST-MR)?
Norming samples did not include defendants with criminal charges, and some of the subjects in validity testing had both mental illness and DD.
A high score on the CAST-MR does not necessarily mean that the individual is competent to stand trial.
471
Limitations of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool - Crimination Adjudication?
Construct may overly assess hypothetical as opposed to case-specific information, and instrument asks very few questions related to capacity to assist counsel.
472
Which instruments look at malingering cognitive deficits for competency to stand trial?
ILK and TOMI (Test of Malingered Incompetence)
473
In this case the USSC articulated that the state is permitted to presume a defendant is competent and to place the burden on the defendant to prove incompetence by a preponderance of the evidence.
Cooper v Oklahoma
474
Standard of proof for IST?
Preponderance of the evidence
475
In the case Jackson v Indiana, what two amendments did Mr. Jackson's attorney argue?
Deprivation of due process and equal protections under the 14th amendment
8th amendment
476
Jackson v Indiana, USSC holding?
An incompetent defendant cannot be held more than the reasonable period of time necessary to determine whether there is a substantial probability that he will regain competence in the foreseeable future.
Once it is clear restoration is unlikely, the defendant must be released or committed under the standard civil commitment criteria.
477
Jackson v Indiana. Facts?
deaf, mute male who was charged with two robberies of $9 value. Was found IST, sent to state hospital for competency restoration.
478
The Court articulated "due process requires that the nature and duration of confinement bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is committed." Case?
Jackson v. Indiana.
479
Riggins v Nevada. Facts?
Riggins was convicted of murder and robbery and sentenced to death. He challenged his conviction on the grounds that Nevada forced him to take antipsychotics during the trial. He had been found competent and the lawyer asked that his meds be stopped.
480
Riggins v Nevada. Holding?
Involuntary administration of antipsychotic medications violated his 6th and 14th amendment rights to a full and fair trial.
481
In this case, the court reasoned that since convicted prisoners cannot be forced to take antipsychotic medications (outside of Washington v Harper - medical appropriateness), pre-trial defendants have at least as much protections. The court left open the possibility that involuntary medication for the purpose of restoring or maintaining competence to stand trial may be permissible.
Riggins v Nevada, 1992.
482
Sell v US, 2003. Facts?
Dr. Sell was charged with multiple counts of mail fraud, dx'd with delusional disorder and found incompetent to stand trial. He refused medication.
483
Sell v US, 2003. Holding?
USSC held that medication to restore trial competence for serious offenses could be administered involuntarily under certain limited circumstances. Four factors:
1) important government interest at stake
2) administration of medication is likely to restore competence and unlikely to have side effects that will interfere with pt's ability to assist counsel.
3) Any alternative is unlikely to achieve same means
4) Medication must be in patients best interest
484
Four factors from Sell v US, 2003?
1) important government interest at stake
2) administration of medication is likely to restore competence and unlikely to have side effects that will interfere with pt's ability to assist counsel.
3) Any alternative is unlikely to achieve same means
4) Medication must be in patients best interest
485
What are the rights waived by plea of guilt? (4)
1) remain silent
2) confront one's accusers
3) jury trial
4) trial counsel
486
What must defendants understand in order to be found competent to enter a guilty plea? (3)
1) nature of the charge
2) penalties associated with the charge
3) rights waived by the plea of guilt
487
Godinez v Moran, 1993. Facts?
Defendant shot and killed a bartender, then killed ex-wife and shot himself. He pled not guilty and was found competent to stand trial. 2 months later he fired his lawyers and pled guilty.
488
In which case did the USSC reject the standard articulated in Seiling?
Godinez v Moran, 1993. USSC held that a person who is competent to stand trial is also competent to plead guilty.
489
In this case the USSC recognized that competence to wiver the right to counsel is not the same as competence to represent oneself.
Godinez v Moran, 1993.
490
From this case clinicians should note that in competence to stand trial evaluations, defendants should be asked about their understanding of rights that are waiver through a plea bargain.
Godinez v Moran, 1993.
491
Indiana v Edwards, 2008. Facts?
Mr. Edwards attempted to steal shoes from a store in Indiana and fired at a security guard. He was found IST and spent time in a psych hospital for restoration. Prior to trial, Mr. Edwards asked to proceed pro se. His request was denied and he was convicted.
492
In this case the court found that the Constitution does not forbid a state to insist that a defendant be mentally competent to conduct a trial himself if the defendant asks to go pro se. The Constitution permits States to insist upon representation by counsel for defendants who meet Dusky criteria but still suffer from mental illness to the point where they are not competent to conduct trial proceedings themselves.
Indiana v Edwards, 2008.
493
In this case the USSC established that a confession is to be considered voluntary unless there is some evidence of police coercion in eliciting it.
Colorado v Connelly, 1986.
494
Waivers of constitutional rights must be: (3)
1) knowingly
2) intelligently
3) voluntary (Colorado v Connelly)
495
Competence to be executed standard articulated in this case requires that a defendant know that he is being executed and the reason for the execution.
Ford v Wainwright, 1986.
496
In this case the prevailing standard for CST was established as specific trial-related capacities and not just a defendant who is oriented.
Dusky v US
497
In the landmark case that effectively overruled Seiling v Eyman, the court identified:
That capacity to waive counsel requires the same level of capacity as capacity to stand trial.
498
According to Cooper v Oklahoma, a defendant may be presumed competent but can apply what standard to prove incompetence?
Preponderance of the evidence.
499
The two prongs of the Dusky competence criteria are:
Rational and factual understanding of the proceedings and ability to consult with an attorney.
500
This case stated that incompetent defendants can be hospitalized only for a reasonable period of time to determine whether restoration is likely.
Jackson v Indiana.
501
In this case the trial court erred in not allowing a petitioner's rational understanding of the reason for execution to be considered in a competence to be executed determination.
Panetti v Quarterman
502
This case established that a defendant may be incompetent to present himself and denied the right to self-representation.
Indiana v Edwards.
503
What was the main issue in Pannetti v Quarterman?
the 8th and 14th amendment entitled him to a fair hearing, including an opportunity to submit "expert psychiatric evidence that may differ from the State's own psychiatric examination.
The Court did not specifically require that a "rational understand" was necessary for competency to be executed though they opined that it was a mistake not to consider this.
504
Dusky criteria was superseded in federal trials by new working specified in what?
Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984. Incompetence requires "present mental disease or defect renders the defendant unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense."
505
The two prongs of the Dusky competence criteria are: Rational and factual understanding of the proceedings and ability to consult with an attorney.
The phrase :rational understanding" has been omitted from a number of state standards. Why?
Dusky interpreted a federal statue and therefore was not based on a constitutional requirement for competence to stand trial.
506
In the Jackson v Indiana opinion, what other landmark case this the USSC refer to?
Baxstrom v Herold (a state prisoner could not be deprived of equal protection at the end of his prison sentence). "If conviction was insufficient to justify less procedural protection against indefinite commitment than is generally available, the mere filing of criminal charges surely cannot suffice."
507
In Jackson v Indiana, what rights were violated?
14th amendment due process (w/o finding dangerousness, one can be held only for a reasonable period of time necessary to determine if he is restorable) and equal protections (had he not been charged with a criminal offense the decision to commit Jackson would be made according to a different standard)
508
This sentence was commonly quoted, "Due process requires that the nature and duration of commitment bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is committed. This comes from what case?
Jackson v Indiana.
509
Wilson v US, what court?
DC Circuit Court of Appeals
510
Amendments in Wilson v US?
5th and 6th. Fair trial and effective assistance of counsel. The due process is guaranteed by the 5th amendment in this case because Mr. Wilson was in federal court.
511
Colorado v Connelly, amendment?
The Court held that coercive police activity is a necessary predicate to finding that a confession is not "voluntary" within the meaning of the due process clause of the 14th amendment.
512
What percentage of time do adults waive their Miranda rights?
80%
513
What percentage of time do juveniles waive their Miranda rights?
95%
514
In Riggins v Nevada, how might Nevada have satisfied due process?
If the prosecution had demonstrated that antipsychotic tx was medically appropriate and that they had considered less intrusive alternatives and if they had acknowledged Ruggins liberty interest in freedom from antipsychotic drugs.
515
In the 2008 decision in this case, the USSC did identify a different standard than Dusky to represent oneself in trial pro se.
Indiana v Edwards
516
In this case the Court held that the Dusky standard should be used for competence to stand trial and decision to plead guilty/waive counsel.
Godinez v Moran, 1993.
517
Substantive portion of due process?
Fundamental fairness.
518
What does fundamental fairness refer to?
Substantive portion of due process under 14th amendment.
519
In this case the Court held that criminal defendants must be allowed to avoid trial if they prove incompetence by a "preponderance of the evidence." (more likely than not”)
Cooper v Oklahoma.
Previously it was clear and convincing (the evidence must be substantially greater than a 50% likelihood of being true). The Court said that this standard would allow the state to try a defendant who is more likely than not incompetent to stand trial.
520
Which case states that you can't medication to make an individual competent to be executed? (implementation of forced medication would constitute cruel, excessive, and unusual punishment.)
State v Perry, Louisiana Supreme Court, 1992
521
Why can State v Perry not be overturned by the USSC?
This opinion is based on the Louisiana Constitution rather than the US Constitution.
522
Both Godinez v Moran and this case involve "a mental condition that falls in a gray area between Dusky's minimal constitutional requirement that measures a defendant's ability to stand trial and a somewhat higher standard that measures mental fitness for another legal purpose.
Indiana v Edwards (the Constitution permits a State to limit a defendant's right to self-representation by insisting upon representation by counsel at trial on the ground that the defendant lacks the mental capacity to conduct his trial defense unless represented.
523
For actus reus (forbidden act), the act must be what two things?
1) voluntary
| 2) conscious
524
For actus reus (forbidden act), the act must be voluntary and conscious. Give an example of automatism.
Somnambulism, epilepsy, metabolic disorders, hypnotic states, fugues.
525
Define automatism.
Technically no act (actus reus) so no crime.
Somnambulism, epilepsy, metabolic disorders, hypnotic states, fugues.
526
Mens rea (guilty intent) requires what?
purposely or knowingly committing an act.
527
If specific intent is an element of the crime, it must be proven by the prosecution at what standard?
Beyond a reasonable doubt.
528
Rex v Arnold (1724). Facts?
Earliest example in which we have the full proceedings of an insanity defense. Arnold shot and wounded Lord Onslow. Arnold was found guilty and sentenced to death. Lord Onslow intervened and is sentence was changed to life in prison. This trial established the "wild beast" standard.
529
Which trial established the "wild beast" standard for insanity?
Rex v Arnold (1724).
530
The "offspring of a delusion" concept foreshadowed the Durham rule. Case?
James Hadfield (1800). Hadfield, in a premeditated act, shot at King George. Hadfield was tried in the house of Lords. Hadfield did not meet the right-wrong test, so his attorney modified the test. A new criterion for insanity, flowing from a delusion rather than lacking all understanding like the wild beast test was established.
531
McNaughtan Trial (1843). Facts?
McNaughtan shot the prime minister's secretary (thought he was the prime minister). Evidence showed that McNaughtan had delusions of persecution two years before the killing. Found NGRI, McNaughtan Rules were established following this case.
532
McNaughtan rule is a combo of what two concepts?
Wild beast (nature and quality of the act) and Spigurnel's right-wrong test (did the defendant know that the specific criminal act was wrong?"
533
wrongfulness (insanity defense) subjective moral vs illegality standard.
Subjective moral: the accused lacks criminal responsibility if, as a result of a psychiatric disorder, they personally believed they were morally justified in their bx even though they may have known that their acts were illegal andor contrary to public standards of morality.
Illegality: the accused lacks criminal responsibility if, as a result of a psychiatric disorder, they lacked the capacity to know that their acts violated the law.
534
The "policeman at the elbow" test is used to assess the ability to what?
Refrain (volition).
535
Rule? If the defendant did know the nature and quality of his act and that it was wrong, was he unable, because of mental disease or defect, to adhere to the right?
Irresistible impulse rule.
536
Test? "The accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act is the product of mental disease or defect."
Durham.
537
Intoxication may serve as a basis for NGRI when? (4)
1) involuntary intoxication
2) pathological intoxication (aggressive and often violent state triggered in some individuals by only a small amount of alcohol)
3) delirium tremens
4) permanent psychosis 2/2 alcoholism
538
Insanity Pendulum.
1) Wild beast
2) McNaughtan
3) Irresistible impulse
4) model penal code
5) durham
539
Clark v Arizona, 2006, USSC. Holding?
Due process is not violated by
1) eliminating "nature and quality" in NGRI test
2) precluding expert testimony on diminished capacity.
540
Ake v Oklahoma, USSC, 1985. Indigent defendants must be provided a psychiatrist to: (3)
1) Assist in assessing NGRI defense.
2) Help cross exam preparation of opposing psychiatrists
3) Help assess mitigating factors for death penalty phase.
541
In this case the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C., 1979 found that a defendant may voluntarily and intelligently forego a NGRI defense.
Frendak v US
542
In this case the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C., 1979 found that a court may impose an NGRI defense on an unwilling competent defendant who refuses it for irrational reasons.
Frendak v US
543
Jones v US, USSC, 1983. Holding?
Requires defendant to prove NGRI by preponderance of the evidence.
544
Requires defendant to prove NGRI by preponderance of the evidence. Case?
Jones v US, USSC, 1983.
545
This case held that NGRI acquittees may be held longer than they would have been incarcerated, if convicted.
Jones v US, USSC, 1983.
546
In Jones v US, USSC, 1983, how is dangerousness defined?
As any criminal act.
547
This case held that an individual with antisocial personality disorder whose psychiatric illness is in full remission may not be held simply because he remains indefinitely dangerous.
Foucha v Louisiana, 1992, USSC.
548
In this case the court held that insanity acquittees may not be held unless they are both what?
Mentally ill and dangerous.
549
What Constitutional rights were violated in Foucha v Louisiana?
Due process and equal protections.
550
In Anglo-American law, a crime requires: (2)
1) forbidden act
| 2) a guilty mind
551
The most liberal and least liberal tests for criminal responsibiity are:
Wild beast test
| Durham rule
552
At the time of the crime, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he did know it that he did not know he was doing what was wrong... and whether the accused at the time of the act know the difference between right and wrong
McNaughtan (1843)
553
If the defendant did know the nature and quality of his act and that it was wrong, was he unable, because of mental disease or defect, to adhere to the right?
Irresistible Impulse Rule (1887)
554
The accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act is the product of mental disease or defect.
Durham Case (1954)
555
A person is not responsible for his criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.
The term "mental disease or defect" do not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct.
American Law Institute (ALI) Rule - Model Penal Code (1955)
556
In this case the court held that treatment for prisoners is guaranteed.
Estelle v Gamble, 1976.
Justice Marshall acknowledged that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments required the Texas government to provide medical care for prisoners
557
The four traditional purposes of punishment are:
retribution, individual restraint, rehabilitation, and deterrence.
558
The 1981 Hinckley insanity verdict led to what?
The Insanity Defense Reform ACt of 1984 by the U.S. Congress.
559
The Insanity Defense Reform ACt of 1984 by the U.S. Congress triggered many states to make 2 changes to their insanity defense criteria. What were they?
1) removal of the volitional arm
2) shifting the burden of persuasion from the prosecution to the defense. Research indicates that only the latter change made a statistically significant difference in reducing NGRI verdicts.
560
Court for Durham v US?
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, 1954.
561
Durham v US, 1954, facts?
Mr. Durham was convicted of housebreaking. He pled NGRI, extensive psychiatric testimony was offered. The judge believed that the evidence was not sufficient to contradict the usual presumption of sanity. The defendant appealed on the issue of who had the burden of proof regarding insanity at the time of the act. The Appellate Court overturned the case because as soon as the defense introduces evidence of a mental disorder the prosecution must prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt.
562
In what case did Judge Bazelon formulate a new test for criminal responsibility?
Durham v US.
563
In Durham v US, Judge Bazelon formulated a new test for criminal responsibility, what was it?
An accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect.
564
In 1972 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals replaced the Durham rule with what?
The ALI/Model Penal Code
565
In 1972 why did the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals replaced the Durham rule with the ALI/Model Penal Code?
Due to the undue dominance by the experts giving testimony regarding the ultimate outcome.
566
John Hinckley was found NGRI under what insanity formulations?
ALI. Once the defense met their burden of production, the prosecution had to prove Hinckley sane beyond a reasonable doubt.
567
Which two places retain the Durham rule?
New Hampshire and the Virgin Islands
568
After the Hinckley trial, the ALI formulation was replaced in federal courts with what?
Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984, placed burden of proof to show NGRI on the defendant by clear and convincing evidence.
569
Judge Bazelon wrote the decisions for what cases?
Durham vs US
Rouse v Cameron, 1996
Lake v Cameron, 1966
570
Which case gave us the concept of "least restrictive alternative?"
Lake v Cameron, 1966, written by Judge Bazelon, in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
571
Washington v US, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1967. Facts?
Mr. Washington was convicted of rape, robbery, and assault with a deadly weapon. On appeal, the defendant contended that the trial judge should have entered a judgement of acquittal by reason of insanity as a matter of law.
572
Washington v US, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1967. Holding?
The Appellate Court refused to turn over the trial court judgement - noting that insanity judgements cannot be precise. The jury must be allowed a wide latitude in its task. This was a latter form of the Durham rule, also written by Judge Bazelon.
Durham was designed to give juries more information... however, there was still too much emphasis on the labels used by psychiatrists. This holding was an attempt to ban psychiatrists from opining on the ultimate issue of insanity.
573
Why did Judge Bazelon want to get rid of the McNaughtan rule?
Experts tended to impose his moral judgement with an opinion about whether the defendant knew right from wrong, experts had too much influence on the jury.
574
Why did Judge Bazelon create the Durham rule?
For Mcnaughtan, experts tended to impose his moral judgement with an opinion about whether the defendant knew right from wrong, experts had too much influence on the jury. Durham was designed to give juries more information... however, there was still too much emphasis on the labels used by psychiatrists.
575
Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984. Describe.
Insanity defense
1) defendant has the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence
2) Affirmative defense: the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts. Mental disease or defect does not otherwise constitute a defense.
576
Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984. Modification of Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 704. Describe.
Opinion on ultimate issue: No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or inference as to whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition constituting an element of the crime charged or of a defense thereto. Such ultimate issues are matters for the trier of fact alone.
577
Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984. Release of Insanity Acquittees. Describe.
The defendant has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that his release would not create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage of property of another due to a present mental disease or defect.
578
Ibn-Tamas v US, DC Court of Appeals, 1979. Facts?
Mrs. Ibn-Tamas was convicted of secondary degree murder while armed, she shot her husband to death. Dr. Walker was scheduled to testify as an expert on "battered women." The trial court excluded her testimony because it would "invade the province of the jury, who are the sole judges of the facts and the triers of the credibility of the witnesses, including the defendant."
579
Ibn-Tamas v US, DC Court of Appeals, 1979. Holding?
The Appellate Court held that the trial court erred in precluding the psychologist's testimony because it would not invade the province of the jury - either on the ultimate issue or on a "beyond the ken" basis. (the jury is just as competent as the expert to consider and weigh the evidence and draw necessary conclusions).
580
Ibn-Tamas v US, DC Court of Appeals, 1979. The court developed a threefold test for admissibility of expert testimony:
1) the subject matter must be so distinctively related to some science as to be beyond the ken of the average layman
2) expert must have sufficient skill, knowledge, or experience in the filedas to make it appear that his opinion will probably aid the trier in his search for true
3) expert testimony is inadmissible if the state of the pertinent art does not permit a reasonable opinion to be asserted even by an expert.
581
On the issue of admissibility of expert witness evidence, Ibn-Tamas v US, 1979, is superseded by which case?
Daubert v Merrell Dow, 1993
582
Relevant question in Ibn-Tamas about admissibility of expert testimony.
Whether the psychologist's methodology for studying battered women has general acceptance (NOT whether there is a general acceptance of the "battered woman" concept derived from the methodology.
583
Ake v Oklahoma is based on what constitutional right?
Based on the 14th Amendment's guarantee of due process of law.
584
Ake v Oklahoma. Facts?
Ake was charged with murdered. At his arraignment the judge ordered him to be evaluated by a psychiatrist d/t his bizarre bx. Found IST, treated in hospital, competent after 6 wks. Attorney requested the court to permit an examination of his sanity at the time of the defense, judge denied request. Ake's defense was NGRI, jury convicted him to death.
585
Ake v Oklahoma. Holding?
A state must provide an indigent criminal defendant with free psychiatric assistance in preparing an insanity defense.
When the state seeks the death penalty on the ground that the defendant presents a danger to society, an indigent defendant is constitutionally entitled to psychiatric assistance in rebutting that assertion.
586
A state must provide an indigent criminal defendant with free psychiatric assistance in preparing an insanity defense. Case?
Ake v Oklahoma
587
Frendak v US, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, 1979. Facts?
Ms. Frendak was indicted for the murder of a co-worker. She alleged someone else had shot the victim with her gun and she declined to enter an insanity plea. She has found CST, however, the trial court imposed the insanity defense against her wishes. The jury found her NGRI. She appealed.
588
Frendak v US, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, 1979. Holding?
A trial judge may not force an insanity defense on a defendant found CST. A trial court's finding of CST is not, in itself, sufficient to show that the defendant is capable of rejecting the insanity defense. The trial judge must make further inquiry into whether the defendant had made an intelligent and voluntary decision.
589
In this case the USSC held that it was not unconstitutional for a trial judge to accept a guilty plea from a efenaat who protested his innocence.
North Carolina v Alford.
590
Jones v US, USSC, 1983. Facts?
Mr. Jones was charged with attempted shoplifting (a jacket), a misdemeanor punishable by no more than 1 year in year, found NGRI and committed to St. Elizabeth's as an insanity acquittee. After he had been hospitalized for more than 1 year, he demanded on due process grounds to be released or at least recommitted pursuant to the applicable civil commitment statute.
591
What are the due process requisites under Addington v Texas (1979)?
Commitment under the general civil commitment statue requires the government to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant remains mentally ill and dangerous.
592
Jones v US, USSC, 1983. Holding?
Insanity acquittee wanted to be released after he max prison sentence was up. Court rejected his argument. The Court supported an indefinite commitment based on the insanity acquittal alone. Defendant could be release when he has regained his sanity OR is no longer a danger to himself or society. The Court's language suggested that the commision of a nonviolent offense should be constitutionally sufficient evidence of dangerousness to sustain the commitment of an insanity acquittee.
593
For NGRI acquittees there is no correlation between the length of the acquitte's hypothetical criminal sentence and the length of time necessary for his recovery. Case?
Jones v US, USSC, 1983.
594
Foucha v Louisiana, USSC, 1992. Facts?
Mr. Foucha was charged with aggravated burglary and illegal discharge of a firearm. Found NGRI. There was no evidence of mental illness other than ASPD, he had many altercations at the facility. In Louisiana, the trial court must hold a hearing to determine whether an insanity acquittee is dangerous to himself or others. If he is found to be dangerous, he may be returned to the hospital whether or not he is mentally ill.
595
Foucha v Louisiana, USSC, 1992. Holding?
The judgement of the Louisiana State Court upholding Foucha's continued confinement was reversed. The majority held that Foucha's due process rights were violated because the Louisiana statue allowed an insanity acquittee to be committed to a mental institution until he is able to demonstrate that he is not dangerous, even though he does not suffer from any mental illness.
596
Foucha v Louisiana, USSC, 1992. Three difficulties with the state's attempt to confine Foucha on the basis of his antisocial personality disorder were identified:
1) Keeping him against his will in a mental institution was improper absent a determination in civil commitment proceedings of current mental illness and dangerousness (Vitek v Jones). Due process requires that the nature of the commitment bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is committed (Jackson v Indiana 1972)
2) If Foucha can no longer be held as an insanity acquittee in a mental hospital, he is entitled to constitutionally adequate procedures to establish the grounds for his confinement (Jackson v Indiana).
3) The substantive component of the Due Process Clause bars certain arbitrary wrongful government actions regardless of the fairness of the procedures used to implement them (Zinermon v Burch). The state may not incarcerate Foucha as punishment because he was never convicted.
597
Foucha v Louisiana, USSC, 1992. Four judges concluded that the Louisiana statute also discriminated against Foucha on the basis of the equal protections clause of the 14th amendment. Describe.
Insanity acquittees who are no longer mentally ill are treated differently than criminals who have completed their prison terms (Baxstrom v Herold, 1960). Many prisoners have ASPD.
598
Clark v Arizona, USSC 2006. Facts?
Mr. Clark was charged with murder of a police officer. He pled NGRI. The Arizona statue at the stated that the defense had to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he did not know the criminal act was wrong d/t mental illness. He was convicted.
599
Clark v Arizona, USSC 2006. 2 issues?
1) Arizona had eliminated the "whether the defendant knew the nature and quality of his act" - was this constitutional?
2) whether a prior Arizona SC decision which prohibited the defendant from introducing evidence of mental illness to rebut evidence of requisite criminal intent violated constitutional due process.
600
Clark v Arizona, USSC 2006. Holding?
Due process does not prohibit Arizona's use of an insanity test stated solely in terms of the capacity to tell whether an act was right or wrong. Arizona has a right to preclude mental health testimony on the issue of mens rea without violating due process.
601
In this case the SC indicated that there was no constitutional minimum that states must have in phasing the insanity defense standard.
Clark v Arizona, USSC 2006.
602
Causation - element to be proven in a tort. Consists of two prongs:
1) Cause-in-fact: tortfeasor's act or omission was a necessary antecedent to plaintiff's injury. The cause w/out which the event could not have occured.
2) Proximate cause: analyzed in terms of foreseeability. Liability imposed if defendant should have foreseen the tortious injury.
603
Comparative negligence?
Plaintiff's damages are offset to degree that fact finder determines plaintiff to have contributed to harm. Many states now have a 50% rule where plaintiff recovers nothing if plaintiff more than 50% responsible.
604
Contributory negligence?
When plaintiff is found by the fact finder to be negligent, in which case recovery may be totally barred.
605
Phenomenon whereby individuals overestimate the probability that a poor outcome could have been anticipated when they know there was a poor outcome beforehand.
Hindsight bias.
606
Three components of informed consent?
1) voluntariness of choice
2) understanding and access to the relevant information
3) mental competence to make the decision at issue.
607
Intentional tort: the intent element is satisfied when tortfeasor acts with desire to bring harmful consequences and is substantially certain that such consequences will follow. Examples?
therapist-patient sex, assault, battery, false imprisonment, misrepresentation, fraud
608
Intervening/superseding cause?
Event that takes effect after defendant's negligence, breaking chain of causation. Often rapidly precipitates the injury and may well supersede defendant's negligence in causing plaintiff injury. (ex: inpatient's wife tells him he wants and divorce and he dies by suicide later that evening).
609
Failure to behave with level of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised under same circumstances.
Negligence.
610
The psychiatrist is required to exercise, in both dx and tx, the reasonable degree of knowledge and skill which is ordinarily possessed and exercised by other members of the profession in similar circumstances.
Average practitioner standard.
611
The psychiatrist could be held liable if a plaintiff proves that the physician failed to provide reasonable and prudent care in light of all of the circumstances, even though the physician adhered to customary practice in the field.
Reasonably prudent practitioner.
612
A legal wrong committed upon the person or property independent of contract. Umbrella concept encompassing: negligence and recklessness.
Tort
613
Res ipa loquitor
"The thing speaks for itself." Legal doctrine implying plaintiff need only show a particular result occurred and would not have occurred but for negligence.
614
"The thing speaks for itself." Legal doctrine implying plaintiff need only show a particular result occurred and would not have occurred but for negligence.
Res ipa loquitor (ex: amputation of wrong arm; rare in psychiatry)
615
Respondeat superior
Legal doctrine holding that a physician may be held liable for acts of employees, supervisees or trainees.
616
Legal doctrine holding that a physician may be held liable for acts of employees, supervisees or trainees.
Respondeat superior
617
What % of malpractice cases settle before trial?
90%
618
Standard of proof for neglience?
Plaintiff must prove by preponderance of the evidence.
619
4 elements of neglience?
1) duty
2) dereliction
3) direct cause
4) damages
620
Explain dereliction.
Deviation from the generally accepted standard of good medical practice by an act of omission or commision.
621
Errors of judgement usually actionable only when a decision is "such a substantial departure from accepted professional judgement... as to determine that the person responsible actually did not base the decision on such judgement." Case?
Youngberg v Romeo
622
What is sometimes articulated as the "but for" test: but for the defendant's act of negligence, the injury would not have occured.
Cause-in-fact (direct case) in malpractice cases
623
Exemplary damanges
Another word for punitive damages meant to punish defendant and set an example.
624
Vicarious liability.
Form of secondary liability under the common law doctrine of agency. Example employers are vicariously liable.
625
Respectable minority doctrine.
"Two schools of thought." Malpractice defense precluding liability if defendant can show physicians are divided over appropriate tx course and defendant picked one of the acceptable options.
626
What percent of inpatients who died by suicide were on 15 minute checks or 1:1 observation?
50%
627
What % of states use reasonable physician standard and reasonable patient standard of disclosure?
50/50
628
Two states use the subjective standard of disclosure. What is this?
What would a specific patient consider material information in terms of her own subjective tx goals?
629
Define reasonable patient standard of disclosure.
"Patient's right to self-decision shapes the duty to reveal... the scope of the doctor's communications must be measured by the patient's needs." What would a prudent person in the pt's position have decided if suitably informed.
630
Most common type of medical malpractice reform?
Caps limiting plaintiff's compensation - implemented in over 1/2 of states
631
Apology laws - research indicates...
increase probability of lawsuits, increased payments by insurers, and increase defense costs for non-surgeons.
632
May lead expert to apply inappropriately high standard. Tendency to overestimate own abilities and make self-serving judgements.
Egocentric bias.
633
Tendency to pay greater attention to evidence supporting what you already believe.
Confirmation bias.
634
Failure to use the defendant's psychiatrist's perspective: what the defendant psychiatrist knew, or should have known, prior to the damages, excluding portions of the database that defendant could not reasonably have known prior to adverse outcomes.
Omniscient perspective
635
Two prongs of causation: Necessary antecedent?
Cause-in-fact
636
Two prongs of causation: Substantial factor?
Proximate cause, analyzed in terms of foreseeability
637
A specific act ex ante created or enhanced the risk of an untoward outcome. It is NOT predictability.
Foreseeability
638
Res ipa loquitur can only be applied when what 4 conditions are met?
1) harm rarely occurs in absence of negligence
2) harm caused by means w/in defendant's exclusive control
3) plaintiff did not contribute to harm
4) defendant has exclusive access to facts about the harm
639
The most common cause of action against psychiatrists is:
suicide
640
From a forensic-legal standpoint, suicide malpractice cases turn on which two elements?
1) foreseeability
| 2) precautions taken
641
Civil sanctions for sexual malpractice include (4)
1) malpractice
2) intentional tort
3) breach of contract
4) loss of consortium
642
Inviting a pt's spouse to therapy to confront him about abuse, recommending a pt get divorced, instructing a patient to sue her previous psychiatrist for negligent prescribing all could lead to what?
Transferred negligence via a duty to 3rd party.
643
Issues in this case included:
1) Informed consent was not obtained
2) Medication was used for staff convenience
3) failure to: monitor for tardive dyskinesia
Clites v Iowa.
644
In Roy v Hartogs, punitive damages were denied by the court because:
Defendant had no evil/malicious intent
645
Which case was a showdown between biological and psychoanalytic psychiatry?
Osheroff v Chestnut Lodge
646
Clites v State of Iowa, Court of Appeals of Iowa, 1982. Facts?
Mr. Clites had ID and resided at a state hospital since age 11. He was given major tranquilizers to curb aggressive bx from age 18-23. In 1975 he was dx'd with tardive dyskinesia. Hsi father filed a claim against the state for negligent use of drugs. The trial court found that the defendants failed to provide reasonable medical care.
647
Clites v State of Iowa, Court of Appeals of Iowa, 1982. Holding?
Mr. Clites had ID and resided at a state hospital since age 11. He was given major tranquilizers to curb aggressive bx from age 18-23. In 1975 he was dx'd with tardive dyskinesia. Hsi father filed a claim against the state for negligent use of drugs. No consent for medication had been sought by the facility. The trial court found that the defendants failed to provide reasonable medical care. Appellate Court upheld the trial court's conclusion.
648
First appellate case affirming the need for informed consent to avoid paying damages for tardive dyskinesia.
Clites v State of Iowa, Court of Appeals of Iowa, 1982.
649
Clites v State of Iowa, Court of Appeals of Iowa, 1982. Opinion cited what cases in its decision? (3)
Youngberg right to treat case
| Rennie and Rogers right to refuse tx cases
650
Roy v Hartogs, NY Appellate Term, Supreme Court (1976). Facts?
Dr. Hartog had sex with Ms. Roy. She successfully sued him for compensatory and punitive damanges.
651
Roy v Hartogs, NY Appellate Term, Supreme Court (1976). Holding?
Verdict was upheld but damages were reduced. Damages were due to failure to tx properly. Punitive damages were denied because the Appellate Court did not believe that the defendant had evil or malicious intentions.
652
Four exceptions to informed consent:
1) emergency
2) incompetency. Consent should be sought from a guardian or other appropriate substitute decision maker
3) Waiver (pt asks the physician to make medical decisions for them)
4) Therapeutic privilege: A physician may withhold information from a pt if telling the pt would constitute clear threat to the pts health or render him ineffective in making decisions
653
Term that relates to the tendency for the research subject to believe that the research is for therapeutic purposes rather than designed to answer a larger study question.
Therapeutic Misconception
654
Hargrave v Vermont, Second Circuit Court of Appeals, 2003. Facts?
Ms. Hargrave completed a psychiatric advance directive that indicated she refused antipsychotic and psychotropic medication. When she was involuntarily committed and appeared incompetent, the hospital petitioner the court to treat her. A Vermont statue required a waiting period of 45 days and then would allow her to be medicated against her will. Ms. Hargrave challenged the statue based on Title II of the ADA, stating she was being discriminated against in that due to her mental illness she was not afforded the same public service opportunity for an advance directive. The state argued it was her status as a civil committee and not her mental illness that led to her being treated differently, and that she qualified as an exclusion to the ADA because she posed a "direct threat" which was evidenced by her having been civilly committed.
655
Hargrave v Vermont, Second Circuit Court of Appeals, 2003. Holding?
Upheld Ms. Hargrave's advanced directive and she was permitted to refuse medication.
656
Models of Vicarious Decision-Making: Explicit Patient Choice
When an incompetent person has made his wishes clear during a period of competency, those directives should be followed.
657
Models of Vicarious Decision-Making: Best Interest
The decision-maker advances what he or she believes to be the ward's best interest. The decision is generally made based upon what most people would want to do in a similar situation.
658
Models of Vicarious Decision-Making: Substituted Judgement.
The decision-maker acts based upon what he or she believes the ward would have wanted had the ward been competent. Problems arise in cases where a ward has never been competent (ID) or never voiced a preference.
659
This case established that the right to die was not a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of Health, 1990, USSC
660
This case set out rules for what was required for a third party to refuse treatment on behalf of an incompetent person.
It established that absent a living will or clear and convincing evidence of what the incompetent person would have wanted, the state's interests in preserving life outweigh the individual's rights to refuse treatment.
It left it to the states to determine their own right-to-die standards, rather than creating a uniform national standard.
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of Health, 1990, USSC
661
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of Health, 1990, USSC. Facts?
Nancy Cruzan, 25 y/o was in a vegetable state 2/2 MVA.
662
Which case called for the reasonable medical practicioner standard?
Natanson v Kline, Supreme Court of Kansas...Irma Natanson had a radical mastectomy and sued that she hadn't been informed of the risks of treatment.
663
In this case a patient's psychiatric advanced directive could not be denied on the basis of mental illness.
Hargrave v Vermont.
664
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, Wayne County, 1973. Amendment?
1st amendment protects the freedom to express ideas and it necessarily follows that it must protect freedom to generate ideas... in this case "experimental psychosurgery often leads to blunting of emotions, the deadening of memory, the reduction of affect..."
665
Canterbury v Spence, US Court of Appeals, 1972. Facts?
Mr. Canterbury, age 19 with back pain had a laminectomy. Suffered paraplegia. He alleged that he was not informed of the risks, namely a 1% risk of paraplegia. Dr. Spence stated that he believed communication of the paraplegia risk to the patient was not good medical practice - it might deter patients from undergoing needed surgery and might produce adverse psychological reactions.
666
Canterbury v Spence, US Court of Appeals, 1972. Holding?
Mr. Canterbury, age 19 with back pain had a laminectomy. Suffered paraplegia. He alleged that he was not informed of the risks, namely a 1% risk of paraplegia. Dr. Spence stated that he believed communication of the paraplegia risk to the patient was not good medical practice - it might deter patients from undergoing needed surgery and might produce adverse psychological reactions. Appellate Court reversed and remanded for a new trial.. "materiality of the information" standard.
667
Case? What would a prudent person in the pt's position have decided if suitably informed of all perils bearing significance.
Canterbury v Spence, US Court of Appeals, 1972.
668
Canterbury v Spence, US Court of Appeals, 1972. "Materiality of the information." Are medical experts necessary to show lack of informed consent?
NO
669
The holding establishes that once a state develops a statue for advanced directives, involuntarily committed individuals w mental illness cannot be excluded from the provisions expressed in such directives absent a medical/psychiatric emergency (true in NY and Vermont).
Hargrave v Vermont, 2nd circuit, 2003
670
Medical records about substance use cannot be disclosed in court proceedings unless both of two conditions are met:
1) Subpoena
2) Court order has authorized disclosure (a court must find that the need for the information outweighs the public policy in favor of confidentiality.
671
The right to bar another person from testifying based on information that person has gained from contacts with him.
Privilege
672
Tarasoff v The Regents of UC, Supreme Court of CA, 1976. Facts?
Mr. Poddar was in therapy and told the therapist he was going to kill Tarasoff. He wrote a letter to the police who interviewed Mr. Poddar. He convinced them he was not dangerous. He also terminated therapy. He later stabbed Tarasoff to death.
673
Tarasoff v The Regents of UC, Supreme Court of CA, 1976. Holding #1?
A therapist bears a duty to use reasonable case to give threatened persons such warnings as are essential to avert foreseeable danger arising from a patient's condition.
674
Tarasoff v The Regents of UC, Supreme Court of CA, 1976. Holding #2?
The discharge of this duty may require the therapist to take one or more steps: wan the intended victim, notify the police, or take whatever steps are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.
675
In re Lifeshutz, California Supreme Court, 1970. Facts?
Patient brought a suit for emotional distress against a HS student who had assaulted him. Defense subpoenaed Dr. Lifeshutz notes from a 6 month therapy course 10 yrs prior. Dr. Lifeshutz refused citing privilege even though patient had consented.
676
In re Lifeshutz, California Supreme Court, 1970. Holding?
The patient, not the doctor, owns the privilege i.e. right to bar testimony and evidence from a judicial hearing.
677
Lipari v Sears, Roebuck and Co.m US District Court, Nebraska, 1980. Facts?
Mr. Cribbs sought to purchase a gun from a Sears store. Since he had been an involuntary psych patient he completed a form stating this. The salesman suggested he deny it on the form... one month later he left the VA outpt tx program AMA and then fired the gun and killed Mr. Lipari. Mrs. Lipari filed suit against Sears for negligently selling the gun to a known mentally ill person.
678
Lipari v Sears, Roebuck and Co., US District Court, Nebraska, 1980. Holding?
Based on Nebraska law, the court concluded there was a tarasoff duty - a duty to any class of individuals who are foreseeable victims, including the public at large. Of note, Nebraska subsequently passed a tarasoff-limiting statue that precludes this type of case because the duty is limited to identifiable victims.
679
Doe v Roe, NY County Supreme Court, 1977. Facts?
A former patient Ms. Doe brought action against her psychiatrist, Dr. ROe, who published a book "which reported verbatim and extensively the pt's thoughts."
680
Doe v Roe, NY County Supreme Court (trial court), 1977. Holding?
A former patient Ms. Doe brought action against her psychiatrist, Dr. ROe, who published a book "which reported verbatim and extensively the pt's thoughts."
Held that the plaintiff was entitled to an injunction and compensatory damages.
681
Jaffee v Redmond, USSC, 1996. Facts?
Redmond, a police officer, shot and killed Mr. Allan while on patrol. Jaffee, executor of Allan's estate, filed suit alleging that Officer Redmond had violated Allan's constitutional rights by using excessive force. Officer Redmond participated in 50 counseling sessions with a LCSW. They refused to provide access to tx notes. Judge told jury to presume that the contents of the notes were unfavorable.
682
The issue in this case was "is it appropriate for federal courts to recognize a "psychotherapist privilege" under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence?
Jaffee v Redmond, USSC, 1996.
683
Jaffee v Redmond, USSC, 1996. Holding?
The conversations between Redmond and her therapist are protected from compelled disclosure under Rule 501. This is limited to federal court, does not include military court martials or those cases in federal court governed by state law.
684
Define sexually violent predator.
A person who has been designated by statue as either having committed or having been convicted of committing a sexual offense and has been diagnosed with a mental disease that makes the person likely to engage in future predatory acts.
685
Any intense and persistent sexual interest other than sexual interest in genital stimulation or preparatory fondling with phenotypically normal, physically mature, consenting human partners.
Paraphilia
686
A paraphilia that is currently causing distress or impairment to the individual or a paraphilia whose satisfaction has entailed personal harm or risk of harm to others.
Paraphilic disorder
687
Usual age of onset for paraphilias.
Age 10-20.
688
The paraphilias with the greatest number of victims (in decreasing order):
exhibitionism, frottage (the practice of touching or rubbing against the clothed body of another person in a crowd as a means of obtaining sexual gratification), pedophilia against boys outside the home, and voyeurism.
689
Describe "crossing."
Paraphilic persons tend to cross over between touching and non-touching of their victims, between family and non-family, etc... it is important because it is associated with a greater risk for recidivism.
690
Female sex offenders. List 3 differences between female and male sex offenders.
1) Offend against same sex victims in nearly half the cases (males only 10%)
2) Had male accomplice in 30% of cases (males only 2%)
3) Females with accomplices are usually male/female pairs that are romantically involved.
691
Question: is child porn possession a valid indicator of pedophilia.
Child porn offending is a stronger diagnostic indicator of pedophilia than is sexually offending against a child.
692
Question: Do child porn offenders differ from contact offenders in their level of pedophlic interest
Mixed offenders = most pedophilia, then child porn only, then contact offenders.
693
Risk assessment tools for child porn offenders? (3)
1) Combating paedophile Information networks in europe (COPINE) - scale to classify the severity of sexual exploitation images
2) Child Porn Offender Risk Tool (CPORT): predicts sexual recidivism among male offenders with a conviction for child porn offense
3) Kent Internet Risk Assessment Tool (KIRAT):
694
By 1976, 30 states had enacted sex offender commitment laws known as:
Mentally disordered sex offender status. Allowed people charged with certain sexual offenses to be committed to secure residential tx programs for an indeterminate length of time.
695
Specht v Patterson, USSC, 1967. Facts?
Specht filed a habeas corpus petition to challenge his detention under the Colorado "Sex Offenders Act." The Act required an individual to undergo a psychiatric evaluation that determined whether or not the person was treatable and should be committed to a state institution. The result was a potential indefinite hospital commitment. He complained that the statue did not allow him a notice and a hearing to challenge the evidence presented in court.
696
Specht v Patterson, USSC, 1967. Holding?
Held that the 14th amendment due process clause was violated by not giving Specht the following 6 protections: right to present with counsel, have notice, have a hearing, confront the evidence against him, cross-examine witnesses, offer his own evidence and be heard.
Justice based the ruling on the fact that Specht was held on a new finding of fact not included within the original criminal charge and because Specht could be held in excess of the 10 yr max prescribed for "indecent liberties."
697
In this case the USSC held that the 14th amendment due process clause was violated by not giving the defendant the following 6 protections: right to present with counsel, have notice, have a hearing, confront the evidence against him, cross-examine witnesses, offer his own evidence and be heard. (sex offender case)
Specht v Patterson, USSC, 1967.
698
In this case it is significant that due process protections were accorded when the results of a psychiatric evaluation were to be used in sentencing and involuntary tx.
Specht v Patterson, USSC, 1967.
699
Allen v Illinois, USSC, 1986. Facts?
Allen was charged with unlawful restraint and deviate sexual assault, though he was not tried on these charges. The State filed a petition to have Mr. Allen declared a sexually dangerous person under the Illinois Sexually Dangerous Person Act. The trial court ordered two psychiatric exams over Allen's protest that this violated his 5th amendment right against self-incrimination. During the exam he acknowledged sexually deviant bx.
700
Allen v Illinois, USSC, 1986. Holding?
Upheld Allen's detention. Proceedings under the Sexually Dangerous Persons Act are not criminal within the meaning of the 5th amendment's guarantee against self-incrimination because the Act's aim is tx not punishment. Act is civil and protection against self-incrimination in criminal proceedings does not apply.
701
Hendricks v Kansas, USSC, 1997. Facts?
In 1994, Kansas enacted the Sexually Violent Predator Act, which establishes procedures for the civil commitment of persons who, due to a "mental abnormality" or personality disorder are likely to engage in "predatory acts of sexual violence."
Leroy Hendricks had a long hx of sexually molesting children and was scheduled for release shortly before the Act became law. A jury determined that he suffered from pedophilia and qualified under the Act. He challenged his commitment on substantive due process, double jeopardy and ex post facto grounds.
702
Hendricks v Kansas, USSC, 1997. Holding? (3 parts)
USSC held that the statue was constitutional. 3 key points:
1) substantive due process not violated as the term "mental illness" is not required as a basis of civil commitment.
2) double jeopardy and ex post facto clause not violated, protections are for criminal matters only, Act was civil.
3) Failure to offer tx does not mean Act is punitive.
703
Kansas v Crane, USSC, 2002. Facts?
Mr. Crane was convicted of lewd and lascivious bx. He was dx'd with exhibitionism and ASPD. UNder Kansas SVP Act he was committed as a SVP. Kansas Supreme Court reversed and concluded that Kansas v Hendricks requires a finding that the defendant cannot control his dangerous bx.
704
Kansas v Crane, USSC, 2002. Holding?
Kansas SVP Act constitutional.
The 14th amendment's due process clause does not require a state to prove that a SVP "cannot" control his criminal sexual bx before the state can civilly commit him, but the Constitution does not permit commitment of the type of dangerous sexual offender w/o any lack-of-control determination. In Kansas v Hendricks, the abnormality makes it "difficult" if not impossible for the dangerous person to control his dangerous bx.
705
Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and SVO Registration Act, 1994.
1) sex offenders are required to register for at least 10 yrs
2) SVP are required to register as a sex offender for life
3) Requires sentencing court to determine whether a person is no longer a SVP.
706
Megans Law.
Mandates authorities to notify residents regarding convicted sex offenders living in the area. Mandatory community notification.
707
Adam Walsh Child Protection Act of 2006.
Expanded sex offender policies
1) enhancing penalties
2) expanding internet investigations and prosecution for child porn
3) added a central compilation of all state sex offender registries (SORNA)
708
SORNA (sex offender registration and notification act)
1) sex offenders must register before they are released from prison
2) applies retroactively
3) must register when traveling
4) juvenilesex offenders at least 14 yrs old required to register
709
US v Comstock, USSC, 2010. Facts?
Mr. Comstock was serving a 37-month sentence in federal prison for possession of child porn. 6 days before release he was classified, bt clear and convincing evidence as a "sexually dangerous person" under 18 USC 4248. He challenged being detained under 4248 alleging that it violated the necessary and proper clause (a provision under article 1 section 8 of the US constitution that enables congress to make laws required for the exercise of its other enumerated powers
710
US v Comstock, USSC, 2010. Holding?
Held that the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress authority sufficient to enact 4248.
711
USSC held that the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress authority sufficient to enact 4248. Case?
US v Comstock, USSC, 2010.
712
US v Comstock, USSC, 2010. Facts?
Mr. Comstock was serving a 37-month sentence in federal prison for possession of child porn. 6 days before release he was classified, bt clear and convincing evidence as a "sexually dangerous person" under 18 USC 4248. He challenged being detained under 4248 alleging that it violated the necessary and proper clause (a provision under article 1 section 8 of the US constitution that enables congress to make laws required for the exercise of its other enumerated powers
713
US v Comstock, USSC, 2010. Holding?
Held that the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress authority sufficient to enact 4248.
714
USSC held that the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress authority sufficient to enact 4248. Case?
US v Comstock, USSC, 2010.
715
What type of sexual offender, whether treated or not, have lower rates of recidivism than pedophiles and rapists?
Incest offenders
716
The strongest predictors of sexual offender recidivism in order of predictive accuracy:
1) pedophilic sexual preference on phallometric testing
2) any deviant sexual offense
3) prior sexual offense
4) failure to complete tx
Variables not associated with recidivism: hx of sexual abuse as a child, substance use, anxiety/depression
717
According to the APA Task Force, the tx approach most likely to have an effect on sex offender recidivism is:
a combined pharmacological, CBT, and relapse prevention approach.
718
The case strongly reflects trends established by Washington State's Community Protection Act.
Kansas v Hendricks.
719
Which of the following paraphilias has the lowest incidence of crossover when compared to other paraphilias?
transexualism
720
Plethysmography is most useful when the evaluee has a ___ level of deviant sexual arousal or a ____ level of normal sexual arousal.
HIGH
| LOW
721
Washington State's Community Protection ACt of 1990 established:
1) Tx takes place after punishment
| 2) A personality disorder was sufficient to qualify for a SVP.
722
In Allen v Illinois, Allen protested that the procedures used to commit him violated what amendaments?
5th
723
Washington State's Community Protection ACt of 1990 establihsed:
1) Tx takes place after punishment
| 2) A personality disorder was sufficient to qualify for a SVP.
724
Requires states to establish stringent registration programs for sex offenders
Wetterling Act
725
Established SORNA provisions
Adam Walsh Act
726
Mandates authorities to notify residents regarding convicted sex offenders living in the area. Mandatory community notification.
Megan's Law
727
Pedophilic sexual preference on phallometric testing is a strong predictor of:
sexual offender recidivism.
728
In Kansas v Crane, the Court held that the Hendricks ruling said what about the requirement of total or complete lack of control?
The Hendricks ruling set forth no requirement of total or complete lack of control.
729
In Allen v Illinois, the Sexually Dangerous Persons Act was deemed civil in nature, but provided some safeguards applicable in criminal proceedings:
1) right to counsel
2) jury trial
3) confront and cross examine witnesses
4) proof beyond a reasonable doubt
730
In this case a Sexual Abuse Treatment program in prison was found to serve a vital penological purpose. The Court found that offering inmates minimal incentives to participate does not amt to compelled self-incrimination prohibited by the 5th.
McKune v Lile, USSC, 2002.
731
US v Comstock, the Court held that the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress authority sufficient to enact 4248. They gave 5 reasons for their ruling:
1) Clause grants Congress broad authority to pass laws
2) Congress has already authorized civil commitment of federal prisoners w mental illness whoa re dangerous and 4248 is a "modest addition" to this statutory approach
3) The Federal Government has the constitutional power to act in order to protect the community from potentially dangerous prisoners
4) 10th amendment does not limit authority to states
5) Section 4248 is narrow in scope and does confer on Congress a general police power
732
This case held that the constitutional minimum standard of proof required for civil commitment is clear and convincing evidence.
Addington v Texas.
733
This case held that the constitutional minimum for civil commitment of minors is less than full judicial review given to adults. Parent's rights to investigate illness in their child and seek tx outweighed child's liberty interests.
Parham v JR, USSC.
734
This case set high watermark at state level for civil commitment. Standard of proof for civil commitment held to be beyond a reasonable doubt, and procedural safeguards similar to criminal commitment were mandated.
Lessard v Schmidt
735
This case rejected custodial care for non-dangerous mentally ill who are not receiving tx.
O'Connor v Donaldson
736
This case held that, except in emergency situations, persons hospitalized psychiatrically could be forcibly medicated only if adjudicated incompetent to make tx decisions AND would have wanted medications had they been competent (rights-driven, substituted judgement model).
Rogers v Commissioner of Mental Health.
737
This case held that involuntary meds could be given when a person is psychiatrically hospitalized if two psychiatrists agree on it (tx-driven, best interest model)
Rennie v Klein
738
This case held that a patient who is incompetent to give informed consent for admission is denied constitutionally guaranteed procedural safeguards when he merely acquiesce to hospitalization.
Zinermon v Burch, USSC
739
USSC has never ruled on substantive criteria for civil commitment. True or False.
True
740
What are the legal bases for civil commitment? (2)
1) parens patriae
| 2) police powers
741
Standard of proof is required by 14th amendment in a civil commitment hearing? Case?
Clear and convincing (Addington v Texas)
742
Least Restrictive Alternative Doctrine was set forth in what case?
Lake v Cameron, 1966
743
Mathews v Eldridge Analysis balances what three things?
1) private interest to be affected by government action
2) risk of erroneous deprivation of interest
3) government's interest
744
State takes responsibility for those unable to care for themselves.
Parens Patriae
745
Define police powers.
State may utilize its powers on behalf of community to deprive an individual of liberty to protect community and individual.
746
Lake v Cameron, DC Court of Appeals (Bazelon Court), 1966. Holding?
A patient cannot be held involuntarily in a psychiatric hospital if there is a less restrictive tx alternative.
747
Lake v Cameron, DC Court of Appeals (Bazelon Court), 1966. Facts?
Ms. Lake was 60 y/o, police found her wandering and took her to the hospital, she was later committed to St. Elizabeths. She filed habeas corpus. 2 psychiatrists testified that she was mentally ill, not DTO/DTS, but was prone to wandering away. They concluded that she did not need constant supervision, and could be in a nursing home or other supervised setting.
748
Lake v Cameron, DC Court of Appeals (Bazelon Court), 1966.
A patient cannot be held involuntarily in a psychiatric hospital if there is a less restrictive tx alternative.
749
Lessard v Schmidt, Federal District Court, 1972. Facts?
Ms. Lessard was picked up by police in front of her residence and taken to a mental health center. Police completed an emergency detention form and a judge permitted her confinement for 10 days. Psychiatrist examined her, dx'd schizophrenia, and recommended permanent commitment. Neither Lessard or anyone else that might act on her behalf were informed of the proceedings. She filed suit under 42 USC 1983 claim, she alleged that the Wisconsin procedure for involuntary civil commitment denied her due process of law.
750
Criminalization of civil commitment.
Lessard v Schmidt, Federal District Court, 1972.
751
Lessard v Schmidt, Federal District Court, 1972. = Criminalization of civil commitment. Mandated what?
1) Burden of proof on state - beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is mentally ill and dangerous
2) standard = "extreme likelihood will do immediate harm to self/others
3) Procedural safeguards: privilege against self-incrimination, right to counsel, right to effective and timely notice of charges justifying detention, right to a jury trial, exclusion of hearsay evidence, right to be present and cross examine witness
752
O'Connor v Donaldson, USSC, 1975. Facts?
Mr. Donaldson, 34 y/o, married with 3 kids working in a GE defense plant, had a first "episode" in 1943. He was given ECT and resumed normal life. in the mid-50s he developed paranoid delusions that he was being poisoned. At his parent's instigation, he was committed to Florida's State hospital and remained there for 15 years. He repeatedly demanded his release. Donaldson filed suit under 42 USC 1983 in US District Court. The jury returned a verdict for compensatory and punitive damages against Dr. O'Connor, who had refused his release and stated he could only be released to his parents, even though friends offered to take care of him.
753
O'Connor v Donaldson, USSC, 1975. Holding?
A state cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by himself or with the help of willing and responsible friends or family.
754
Addington v Texas, USSC, 1979. Facts?
Mr. Addington had been committed 7 times to state mental hospitals. After being arrested in 1975 for threatening his mother, she filed a petition for his indefinite commitment.
755
Addington v Texas, USSC, 1979. Holding?
Clear and convincing evidence is the standard of proof required by the 14th amendment in a civil commitment hearing.
756
Parham v JR, USSC, 1979. Holding?
Georgia mental health law permitted voluntary admission of minor children by parents or guardians. USSC said it was fine. Parents' right to investigate illness in child and seek tx outweighed child's liberty interest. A formal, adversarial hearing is not necessary. But a neutral fact finder needed to offset parental decision's risk of error.
757
Parham v JR, USSC, 1979. Facts?
JR was being tx'd in a Georgia state hospital. He had ID and aggressive bx. Georgia mental health law permitted voluntary admission of minor children by parents or guardians.
758
Parham v JR, USSC, 1979. Holding?
Georgia mental health law permitted voluntary admission of minor children by parents or guardians. USSC said it was fine. Parents' right to investigate illness in child and seek tx outweighed child's liberty interest. A formal, adversarial hearing is not necessary.
759
In Parham v JR, the court applied what analysis?
Mathews v Eldridge. Balanced the private interest, the risk of erroneous deprivation of such interest through procedures used, state's interest.
760
Zinermon v Burch, USSC, 1990. State's response?
States have not responded to Zinermon by routinely requiring hearings on competence to assent to voluntary admission. Several states have responded by requiring a clinical review of patients within several days of voluntary admission to ascertain appropriateness for hospitalization and whether less restrictive alternatives are available. APA task force recommends that each pt be assess by an admitting psychiatrist upon presentation at the hospital.
761
Zinermon v Burch, USSC, 1990. Holding?
Found confused, admitted on voluntary basis, dx'd with schizophrenia and rx'd meds. Sent to state hospital, also signed in voluntarily although he refused to cooperate in tx and per notes was "confused." No hearing was held regarding his hospitalization and tx. He filed a 42 USC 1983 complaint alleging defendants knew he was incompetent to give informed consent and the failure to initiate Florida's involuntary commitment procedure denied him constitutionally guaranteed procedural rights.
Holding = it was foreseeable that persons requesting tx might be incapable of informed consent. Court felt that Burch's complaint was sufficient to state a 1983 claim for violation of his procedural due process rights.
762
Zinermon v Burch, USSC, 1990. State's response?
States have not responded to Zinermon by routinely requiring hearings on competence to assent to voluntary admission. Several states have responded by requiring a clinical review of patients within several days of voluntary admission to ascertain appropriateness for hospitalization and whether less restrictive alternatives are available. APA task force recommends that each pt be assess by an admitting psychiatrist upon presentation at the hospital.
763
Mental illness for purposes of civil commitment is a legal concept that refers to:
Behavioral evidence.
"A substantial mental disorder which affects thought, mood, perception, orientation. Must significantly impair judgement, bx, capacity to recognize reality or ability to meet the ordinary demands of life.
764
Addington v Texas sets the standard of proof for civil commitment as clear and convincing, 11 state statues specifically require that the need for involuntary hospitalization be proven by the criminal law standard, which is?
Beyond a reasonable doubt. Those statues are still valid because this case sets only the minimum constitutional requirement.
765
Zinermon v Burch, USSC, 1990. Court was concerned that:
A pt incapable of informed consent cannot be relied on to protest his voluntary admission or demand procedural safeguards.
766
Addington v Texas sets the standard of proof for civil commitment as clear and convincing, 11 state statues specifically require that the need for involuntary hospitalization be proven by the criminal law standard, which is?
beyond a reasonable doubt. THose statues are still valid because this case sets only the minimum constitutional requirement.
767
What does Rule 26 (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) mandate?
Experts in federal civil trials must provide the names of all cases in which testimony (court or deposition) was given in the last four years.
768
Ibn-Tamas v U.S. DC Court of Appeals, 1979. Test for admissibility? (3)
1) The subject must be beyond the ken of the average layperson
2) The witness must be qualified
3) The state of the art must permit forming a reasonable opinion.
769
Daubert factors?
1) Has the technique been tested?
2) Published in a peer reviewed journal
3) Is there a known error rate?
4) Do standards exist for the method?
770
Case? Trial judge is the gatekeeper for admission of only valid and reliable expert witness testimony.
Daubert v Merrell Dow, USSC, 1993
771
Daubert factors?
1) Has the technique been tested?
2) Published in a peer reviewed journal
3) Is there a known error rate?
4) Do standards exist for the method?
772
Kumho Tire v Carmichael, USSC, 1999. Facts?
Tire analyst made up his own test for deciding tire defects by the manufacturer.
773
Kumho Tire v Carmichael, USSC, 1999. Holding?
Daubert's gatekeeping function of trial judges applies to ALL expert witnesses, not just scientists.
774
Frye v US, DC Court of Appeals, 1923. Facts?
Mr. Frye was convicted of killing a physician. He appealed the decision based upon the exclusion of a defense proffer of an expert witness to testify the result of a lie detector made upon him. Admission of the expert evidence was objected by the state and excluded by the trial judge.
775
Frye v US, DC Court of Appeals, 1923. Holding?
Mr. Frye was convicted of killing a physician. He appealed the decision based upon the exclusion of a defense proffer of an expert witness to testify the result of a lie detector made upon him. Admission of the expert evidence was objected by the state and excluded by the trial judge.
Judgement was affirmed. The lie detector test had not yet gained such standing and scientific recognition among authorities that would justify the courts in admitting expert testimony deduced from the discovery.
776
"General acceptance" test for admission of scientific discoveries.
Frye test. It is still used in 16 states and DC. The general acceptance test is now only one of several considerations under the Daubert standard.
777
Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, USSC, 1993. Facts?
Two kids born with serious birth defects sued Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals alleging the birth defects had been caused by the mother's ingestion of Bendectin. The federal District Court granted Merrell Dow's request for summary judgement based on a well credentialed expert's affidavit stating that the extensive published literature had not shown the maternal use of Bendectin to be a risk factor for human birth defects. The plaintiff proffered the testimony of 8 experts who based their conclusions on animal studies, chemical structure analysis, and unpublished data. The plaintiff's experts were excluded because it didn't meet the "general acceptance" / Frye standard.
778
Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, USSC, 1993. Holding?
Held that the Federal Rules of Evidence (1975), not Frye, provide the standard for admitting expert scientific evidence in federal trial.
Rule 702 assigned to the trial judge the task of insuring that the expert's testimony both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand.
779
Daubert, the trial judge must make a preliminary assessment of whether the testimony's underlying reasoning or methodology is scientifically valid and properly can be applied to the facts at issue. What factors should he consider?
) Has the technique been tested?
2) Published in a peer reviewed journal
3) Is there a known error rate?
4) Do standards exist for the method?
780
Daubert, what is the appropriate means by which evidence based on valid principles may be challenged?
1) cross examination
2) presentation of contrary evidence
3) careful instruction on the burden of proof
781
Courts of appeal are able to apply what standard when reviewing a district court's reliability determination (daubert)?
"Abuse of discretion" standard
782
Psychopathy is present in what % of the male prisoner population and what % of the overall population?
15-20% of male prisoners
| 0.6% of the overall population
783
USSC ruled that the 8th amendment categorically forbids executing ID individuals because it is contrary to evolving standards of decency in violation of the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment in what case?
Atkins v Virginia
784
The landmark case that established the legal standard of "clear and convincing evidence" for termination of parental rights was:
Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982.
785
Describe the locality rule.
It requires defendant physicians to provide the same degree of skill and care that is required of other physicians practicing in the same or similar community. It places a geographical dimension on the professional standard of care in medical negligence litigation. The strictest form of the locality rule would require the expert witness to proact in the same or a similar community of the case in which they are offering an opinion.
786
Describe substituted judgement. Case?
When the proxy makes the tx decisions based on what the incapacitated individual would have decided if he/she had the capacity to make decisions. Rogers (rights driven)
787
The rationale used by the USSC to uphold the commitment of federnally sexually dangerous persons pursuant to the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act was?
It was consistent with the Necessary and Proper Clause (US v Comstock)
788
Which agents are rx'd to sex offenders to reduce libido?
SSRIs, hormonal agents or antiandrogens
*leuprolide acetate (potent gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor)
medroxyprogesterone acetate
789
In Montgomery v Louisiana (2016), the USSC's retroactive prohibition of mandatory life without parole (LWOP) sentences for juvenile offenders cited evidence on:
Children's diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform.
790
Which agents are rx'd to sex offenders to reduce libido?
SSRIs, hormonal agents or antiandrogens
| *leuprolide acetate (potent gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor)
791
You are conducting a testamentary capacity evaluation on an elderly male with cognitive deficits. A subcortical dementia (Parkinsons) may be distinguished from a cortical dementia (AD) how?
Clinical reports suggest that subcortical syndromes (eg, Parkinson's disease, Extra-pyramidal disorders (such as HD, PD, and Supranuclear Palsy [PSP]), ) involve less severe intellectual and memory dysfunction and lack the aphasia, agnosia, and apraxia typical of the cortical dementias (eg, dementia of the Alzheimer type).
Subcortical = motivation, mood, attention/concentration, cognitive processing speed, and executive function
792
The insanity standard described as a total deprivation of memory and understanding.
Wild Beast standard
793
The ruling that deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of prisoners is a violation of the 8th amendment was opined in which landmark case?
Helling v McKinney extended the requirement that inmates receive required medical care and that not doing so was in violation of the constitution
William McKinney, a Nevada state prisoner, sued his warden and several other prison officials for violating his Eighth Amendment rights by subjecting him to unhealthy levels of second-hand smoke. McKinney shared a cell with a man who smoked five packs of cigarettes a day. He claimed that his health - both current and future - was being harmed by the smoke, and that the prison officials were "deliberately indifferent" to the risk If McKinney could prove that the second-hand smoke posed a serious threat to his future health and that the prison officials had deliberately ignored that threat, White wrote, McKinney would be entitled to relief.
794
Montana v Egelhoff, USSC (1996). Facts?
Mr. Egelhoff was charged with deliberate homicide while he was intoxicated. During his trial he raised the issue of his intoxication at the time of the alleged offense, but the jury was instructed not to consider his intoxicated condition in determining his mental state as an element of the offense.
795
Montana v Egelhoff, USSC (1996). Holding?
Mr. Egelhoff was charged with deliberate homicide while he was intoxicated. During his trial he raised the issue of his intoxication at the time of the alleged offense, but the jury was instructed not to consider his intoxicated condition in determining his mental state as an element of the offense.
Upheld trial court's decision, reversed decision by Supreme Court of Montana. Nothing in the due process clause prevented the states from disallowing consideration of voluntary intoxication when a defendant's state of mind was at issue.
796
Corrections-specific suicide risk factors?
Male gender
first 1-2 weeks of incarceration in a jail or holding facility, being single-celled, on death row
Recent life crisis, receiving new charges
797
Corrections-specific suicide risk-reducing factors?
Visits from family members and good social support
798
The Durham Rule is also known as what test?
Product test
799
The ALI test requests that the evaluator determine whether the defendant's mental illness renders them unable to appreciate the criminality of their act (cognitive prong) OR whether the defendant:
was unable to confirm their behavior to the law (volitional/irresistible impulse prong)
800
The durham rule is also known as what test?
Product test
801
The Mental Health Parity Act requires what?
Annual or lifetime financial limits on mental health benefits be no lower than those offered for medical and surgical needs.
802
In custody disputes, which model states that past parental roles should be the basis of future custody after divorce?
Parental Preference model bases custody on parental roles prior to divorce in an effort to approximate the pre-divorce roles and responsibilities.
803
A federal judge admits a physician's hearsay testimony of a child's sexual abuse allegations in court. Rationale?
The statement was relayed during medical care and pertinent to medical care.
804
Tender Years Doctrine?
According to this rule, courts frequently refused to separate children under 4/10 years old from their mothers without “grave and weighty reasons.”
805
The constitutional standard that governs the conditions of confinement of pre-trial detainees?
Due process clause of the 14th amendment. USSC held that those conditions or restrictions did not amt to punishment of the detainee. Absent a showing of an expressed intent to punish, if a condition is reasonably related it a legitimate governmental objective (Bell test), pretrial detainees have a due process right not to be punished.
(8th amendment does not apply to pretrial detainees if they have not been convicted).
Lawsuit was brought in 1979 by pre-trial detainees re: "double bunking," body cavity searches.
806
The burden of proof in competency to stand trial?
Burden of proof is placed on the party raising the issue.
807
In Dillon v Legg, the Supreme Court of California held that Mrs. Dillion could recover damages for sustaining emotional injuries cause by another's negligence, even though she was not physically threatened herself because:
Her injuries were reasonably foreseeable.
808
In Dillon v Legg, the Supreme Court of California held that Mrs. Dillion could recover damages for sustaining emotional injuries cause by another's negligence, even though she was not physically threatened herself because her injuries were reasonably foreseeable. What three factors must be present?
1) the injured party must be located near the scene of the accident
2) she must experience a direct emotional impact from the accident by witnessing it
3) she must be closely related to the victim
809
Inmate completing his sentence, he stops all recommended psychotropic medications. Can he be transferred to the civil state hospital for tx after he completes his sentence?
No, that would violate his 14th amendment right of equal protection. He should not be treated as categorically different than other individuals for civil commitment.
810
A unique suicide risk factor associated within a correctional facility includes:
single cell housing or SHU
juvenile/youthful status
conviction for a violent crime
first incarceration
recent harassment (bullying, humiliation, sexual assault, peer conflict)
victim of sexual or physical violence in the last 12 months
overcrowded conditions
recent life crisis (new charges, unexpected sentence, recent punitive sanctions)
Longer prison LOS
first 2 months of SHU placement
death row
811
You have been called by a district attorney to evaluate a pre-trial inmate for CST. What do you need to do to be ethical?
A defendant will be assigned counsel if he/she cannot afford it, prior to a prosecutor seeking a competence evaluation. Confirm that the defendant has had access to counsel prior to going forward. At the start of the eval explain your role, etc.
812
This case looked at the question whether Congress was permitted to create legislation involving the civil commitment of sex offenders after they had completed their prison sentence. Lower courts determined that Congress had exceeded the legislative powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause. The USSC stated that Congress has broad authority to pass laws.
US v Comstock
813
What was the ruling of the landmark case Foucha v Us?
Dangerousness is not sufficient justification to retain a person found NGRI if mental illness is no longer present ... the individual should be released.
814
What was the ruling of the landmark case Foucha v Us?
Dangerousness is not sufficient justification to retain a person found NGRI if mental illness is no longer present.
815
In this case, it was determined that "indefinite commitment of an insanity acquittee, based on proof of insanity by only a preponderance of the evidence, comports with due process."
Jones v US
816
The USSC ruled that the execution of offenders who were under age 18 when their crimes were committed violates which constitutional principle? Case?
8th amendment. Roper v Simmons, 2005.
817
The term "bath salts" refers to what?
Synthetic cathinones, chemically related to a stimulant found in the khat plant.
818
Which standard is most stringent - probable cause or reason to believe?
probably cause > reason to believe
819
Federal Rules of Evidence 702 pertains to what?
Scientific expert testimony.
820
Federal Rules of Evidence 702 pertains to what?
Scientific expert testimony.
821
Federal Rules of Evidence 702 pertains to scientific expert testimony. It states that an expert witness may testify: (4)
1) if his knowledge helps the trier of fact understand evidence
2) if his knowledge is based on sufficient facts or data
3) if his testimony is the result of reliable principles and methods
4) if he has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the specific case.
822
A defense forensic psychiatrist wishes to present MRI findings in court as further evidence of the dx of schizophrenia. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence 702, what does the gatekeeper judge need to consider?
Whether relying on MRI scans when dx'ing schizophrenia is a generally accepted practice in the psychiatric community.
823
In Rex v Hadfield, Mr. Hadfield's defense was based on what insanity concept?
Partial insanity. Mr. Hadfield's actions were due to his delusions and not due to a defect in reason.
824
42 y/o man with ASPD and pedophilia. During incarceration in prison on sexual charges, he is required to complete a sexual abuse tx program. Failure to participate automatically leads to a reduction in prison privileges and could lead to transfer to a max security unit. Does this violate his rights?
In McKune v Lile (2002) the USSC ruled that the policy requiring disclosure of sexual crimes did not violate the 5th amendment because consequences for not participating in the program did not lengthen the sentence, it only alters the conditions of confinement by reducing prison privileges or possibly moving to a higher security unit.
825
Patient's with schizophrenia describe AH as:
Voices that are clear, repetitive, at least partially controllable, and sound like real speech that is different than the hearer's own voice and is usually identifiable.
826
Characteristics of women who are violent?
1) impulsive violence and psychotic aggression (less frequently premeditated or predatory aggression compared to men)
2) in the home (less likely toward strangers)
827
A defense-retained expert performing a criminal responsibility evaluation on an incompetent defendant does not face an ethical conflict because:
Any material received is protected and does not have to be revealed. **If evaluees are incompetent they may not understand the expert's role and offer incrimination information that may undermine their defense. This is not the case in defense examinations whose results are protected by work-product rules and attorney-client privilege until a report or testimony are offered.
828
The confidentiality warning at the beginning of an evaluation is not the operative ethical resource for protecting the evaluee - what two things are?
1) privilege
| 2) work-product protections
829
The primary means by which a lower court petitions with Supreme Court to review a case.
Write of Certiorari
830
A conceptual framework for communities to prevent individual with mental illness from entering or penetrating deeper into the criminal justice system.
Sequential Intercept Model
831
This model envisions a series of interception points (law enforcement/emergency services, initial detention/hearings, forensic evaluations/commitmenets, re-entry into the community, community) to prevent individuals with mental illness from entering the criminal justice system. corrections/supports)
Sequential Intercept Model
832
Risk factors that have been shown to be more likely to lead to adult antisocial bxs include:
```
Committing multiple types of crimes (those who commit violent crimes are more likely to commit other crimes)
Hyperactivity
Impaired concentration
Risk-taking/reckless bx
Poor parenting skills
Difficulties with academic achievement
```
833
How is the criminal record of an individual charged with a sexual offense relevant when estimating his or her risk of sexual reoffending? 2 main factors:
1) deviant sexual interests (penile plethysmography, self-reported paraphilic interests, hx of early sexual bx problems, sexual offense hx and victim's ages and genders))
2) antisocial tendencies (ASPD dx, substance us dx, criminal associations, criminal hx, childhood bx problems)
834
Which of the following could be a legitimate condition eligible for an insanity defense?
1) Pedophilia
2) Voluntary intoxication
3) ASPD
4) Major Neurocognitive Disorder 2/2 TBI
5) Gambling disorder
Major Neurocognitive disorder 2/2 TBI
835
Violent offenders often claim dissociative amnesia during the commission of a criminal offense (20-30% of violent offenders and up to 2/3rds of homicide offenders). What is the most likely element of CST affected by dissociative amnesia?
The amnesia impairs the defendant's recall of his actions, interfering with the defendant's ability to assist the attorney in developing a defense.
(may affect ability to testify, but this is not a required element of competence)
836
Attorney would like to retain you for a case - help investigators in determining the credibility of a suspect. Can you participate?
It is not consistent with APA guidelines for psychiatrists to participate in law enforcement interrogations in any form.
837
Which test has a response validity scale and a traumatic stress subscale?
PAL (Personality ASsessment Inventory)
838
In sentencing evaluations in a capital case (death penalty v LWOP), the psychiatric evaluator may be required to address what?
```
Future dangerousness (risk assessment)
Aggravating and mitigating factors
```
839
Sexual harassment litigation requires what?
That the employer discriminated based on gender.
840
What is the relation between amnesia and perpetrators of violent assault?
Partial amnesia of the violent attack can occur in up to 50% of violent perpetrators.
841
In 1984, which of the following was changed in the US Federal system regarding the evaluation and/or standard for Competency to Stand Trial?
The current federal standard, articulated in the Insanity Defense Reform Act (IDRA) of 1984, does not explicitly mention rationality.
The phrase "rational understanding" was no longer present in the language of the law describing competence to stand trial.
The topic of rationality is significant because it bears directly on the ability of a defendant to assist legal counsel and discuss defense strategies.
842
In this case the defendants found IST can be hospitalized only for a reasonable period of time to determine whether competency restoration is likely.
Jackson v Indiana
| Theon
843
A correctional psychiatrist is concerned that an inmate is suffering from mental health issues and that the inmate cannot be given proper tx in prison. The psychiatrist believes that transfer of the inmate to a psychiatric hospital is appropriate. In this situation, the inmate:
Is afforded a right to administrative due process when the intended transfer is to a psychiatric hospital.
Vitek v Jones (1980)
844
Group-to-individual (G2i) inference problem refers to:
the problem of drawing reliable conclusions about particular individuals based on studies that report averaged differences between groups of subjects.
Ex: it may be argued that a defendant with a frontal lobe defect is less able to control impulses based on studies that show that on average people with with frontal lobe defects have less impulse control... but because of bioavailability some individuals with frontal lobe defects have better impulse control that those without.
845
Are therapy notes protected in Federal Court?
In Jaffee v Redmond, the USSC, 1996, found that Federal Rules of Evidence 501 extended psychotherapist-client privilege to federal cases.
846
In Jaffee v Redmond, the USSC, 1996, why did the psychothearpist-patient privilege get extended to federal court under the Federal Rules of Evidence 501? (2)
1) societal benefit to support effective psychotherapy
| 2) all 50 states already recognized some form of psychotherapist-patient privilege at that time.
847
Clites v Iowa
Kid with MR< rx'd antipsychotics without parental consent, developed TD.
Timothy's parents were never informed of the potential side effects of the use, and prolonged use, of major tranquilizers nor was consent to their use obtained. . The conclusion of the trial court that the industry standard *923 required Timothy's parents to be apprised of the dangers and benefits of the prescribed treatment program is supported by the record and is affirmed.
848
An expert witness on astrology could be precluded from giving testimony in federal court becayse:
The discipline itself lacks reliability.
849
Frye v US. Court?
DC Court of Appeals
850
Does the right to due process encompass the right to a competency evaluation before a defendant stands trial? Case?
Dusky v US
851
In a custody case, the primary consideration is the best interest of the child. Case?
Painter v Bannister
852
In what case did the Supreme Court of Minnesota extended a patient's privilege to group psychotherapy sessions.
State v. Andring, 342 N.W.2d 128 (Minn. 1984)
853
Case? The defendant was convicted of several counts of child molestation involving his stepdaughter. During a counseling session, the victim revealed to a psychologist that the defendant had engaged in sexual activity with her, and the psychologist immediately reported the matter to the child welfare agency.
The defendant met with the psychologist the next day, and also discussed his sexual relations with the victim. Over the defendant's objection, the trial court admitted the psychologist's testimony regarding his session with the defendant.
In People v. Stritzinger (1983) 34 Cal.3d 505.
The court held that the trial court erred in admitting the psychologist's testimony as to his session with the defendant, because it did not contain any information that the psychologist was required to report under the Act.
854
In People v. Stritzinger (1983) 34 Cal.3d 505. Holding?
The defendant was convicted of several counts of child molestation involving his stepdaughter. During a counseling session, the victim revealed to a psychologist that the defendant had engaged in sexual activity with her, and the psychologist immediately reported the matter to the child welfare agency.
The defendant met with the psychologist the next day, and also discussed his sexual relations with the victim. Over the defendant's objection, the trial court admitted the psychologist's testimony regarding his session with the defendant.
The court held that the trial court erred in admitting the psychologist's testimony as to his session with the defendant, because it did not contain any information that the psychologist was required to report under the Act.
855
United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the state may not force a defendant to submit to a psychiatric examination solely for the purposes of sentencing. Any such examination violates the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination as well as the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and is therefore inadmissible at sentencing
Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454 (1981)
Dr. Grigson evaluated Smith for competency and then testified in sentencing phase. His attorneys were not notified prior to that evaluation that it would include an estimation of Smith's future dangerousness.
856
Judge David Bazelon, writing for the court in this case, held that there is a "right to treatment" for people confined in mental institutions.
Rouse v Cameron
857
An unsupported assertion by an expert witness is called:
Ipsi dixit
858
Dusky v US is to Jackson v Indiana as Durham v US is to:
Foucha v Louisiana.
Jackson (violated due process to commit incompetent criminal defendant for indefinite period of time)
Foucha (can't hold an insanity acquittee for dangerousness alone, must also have mental illness)
859
Addington v Texas sis to Lessard v Schmidt as Washington v Harper is to:
Rogers v Commissioner (For an institutionalized mental patient already adjudicated incompetent, a decision regarding treatment under "substituted judgment" principles must be made by a judge, not by medical personnel)
860
What cases were decided before a trial on the merits? (4)
An ultimate determination rendered by a court in an action that concludes the status of legal rights contested in a controversy and precludes a later lawsuit on the same CAUSE OF ACTION by the parties to the original lawsuit.
1) Landeros v Flood
2) Lipari v Sears
3) Tarasoff v Reagents
4) Kumho Tire v Carmichael
861
Robinson v CA was based on:
8th and 14th amendment
862
Was defendant’s conviction for addiction to narcotics under the California law cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment? Case?
Robinson v CA
the Court held that laws imprisoning persons afflicted with the "illness" of narcotic addiction inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
863
Case? The Court held that laws imprisoning persons afflicted with the "illness" of narcotic addiction inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Robinson v CA, USSC
864
The proper standard for appellate review of trial court decisions regarding admission of expert testimony under Daubert is:
Abuse of discretion
865
Judge Bazelon authored the opinion on what cases?
Durham v US
Rouse v Cameron
Lake v Cameron
Washington v US
866
The materiality of the information standard of informed consent was first adopted in:
Canterbury v Spence
867
Case? The court held the medical profession responsible for a standard of disclosure of risks that a reasonable practitioner would provide a patient
Natanson v Kline.
(Irma Natanson suffered severely disabling burns as a result of cobalt irradiation for breast cancer in spite of having been told that there were no risks associated with this treatment).
868
Is the conviction of a chronic alcoholic for public intoxication cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment? Case?
Powell v Texas.
869
Powell v Texas. USSC. Facts?
Police arrested Leroy Powell for public intoxication. He was tried, convicted, and fined $20 in the Corporation Court of Austin Texas. On appeal, Powell argued that criminal punishment for public intoxication is cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment, because he had chronic alcoholism. Under this theory, he appeared in public drunk as a compulsive symptom of the disease, not his own choice. The County court of Travis County held that alcoholism is not a defense to the charge and affirmed the conviction.
870
Powell v Texas. Holding?
Is the conviction of a chronic alcoholic for public intoxication cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment? Case?
NO. The plurality found that the record did not prove that alcoholics were totally unable to control their alcohol consumption. The law prohibiting public intoxication did not punish Powell for his alcoholism, but for his being drunk in a public location.
871
Jackson v Indiana. Constitutional rights violated?
The Supreme Court of the United States held that Jackson's commitment under Indiana law deprived him of equal protection and violated his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Jackson's commitment deprived him of equal protection because the law subjected him to a more lenient commitment standard and to a more stringent standard of release than those generally applicable to all others not charged with criminal offenses. In effect, the law condemned Jackson to permanent institutionalization without the showing required for commitment or the opportunity for release. The Court also held that Jackson's commitment violated his due process rights because the nature and duration of his commitment did not bear a reasonable relation to the purpose for which he was committed.
872
The 15 law lords who wrote the McNaughtan opinion had how many questions propounded to them?
5
873
The Durham rule was abandoned after how many years?
18 years
874
Jones v US, Jones was found NGRI for what?
Stealing a coat, misdemeanor
875
USSC held that it was constitutional to tx insanity acquittees as a separate class.
Jones v US
876
The meaning of Jones v US was clarified by which case?
Foucha v Louisiana
877
In Jones vs US, Jones did not have a right to the standard of proof provided in Addington v Texas. Explain.
Indefinite commitment of an insanity acquittee, based on proof of insanity by only a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not), comports with due process. Addington v. Texas (1979) held that the government, in a civil commitment proceeding, must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence (higher standard) that the individual is mentally ill and dangerous. However, the concerns critical to that decision—based on the risk of error that a person might be committed for mere "idiosyncratic behavior"—are diminished or absent in the case of insanity acquitees, and do not require the same standard of proof in both cases. Proof that the acquittee committed a criminal act as a result of mental illness eliminates the risk that he is being committed for mere idiosyncratic behavior.
878
In Estelle v Smith, Smith had which of his rights violated?
5th and 6th (self-incrimination and right to counsel).
His counsel was not notified in advance that the psychiatric examination would consider his future dangerousness, and he was denied the assistance of his counsel in determining whether to submit to the examination and how the psychiatrist's findings could be used against him.
879
In capital cases, does the Fourteenth Amendment require the government to provide an indigent defendant with the psychiatric assistance necessary to prepare an effective insanity defense?
Ake v Oklahoma
At the sentencing hearing, Ake—still unable to afford a psychiatrist—could not provide expert testimony to mitigate his offense and was sentenced to death.
880
In this case, in closing arguments, the prosecutor referenced Nicholas' loss of his mother when calling for the death penalty.
Payne v Tennessee
881
Does the Eighth Amendment prohibit a capital sentencing jury from considering the impact that a victim's death had upon surviving family members?
NO. payne v Tennessee
882
Inflicting the death penalty on an "insane" prisoner violates what amendment? case?
8th, Ford v Wainwright
883
Perry v Louisiana. Case heard where?
After receiving briefs and hearing oral arguments, the Supreme Court vacated certiorari in Perry and instructed the Louisiana state courts to decide the case in
light of the Court's recent decision in Washington v. Harper.
884
Cannot forcibly medicate someone to make them competent for execution.
Perry v Louisiana.
885
A prisoner may not be transferred to a psychiatric hospital w/o a hearing.
Vitek v Jones
886
This case listed safeguards for hypnotically refreshed testimony.
State v Hurd
887
Rock v Arkansas. Facts?
Vickie Rock was charged with manslaughter for the death of her husband, Frank Rock. Vickie and Frank had argued after Frank refused to let Vickie eat pizza and prevented her from leaving the apartment to get something else to eat. As the fight escalated, Vickie picked up a handgun and at some point Frank received a fatal gunshot wound to the chest. The police arrived and arrested Vickie. Because Vickie was unable to recall the shooting in any detail, on the advice of her attorney, she submitted to hypnosis in an attempt to refresh her memory. During one session, Vickie recalled that her finger had not been on the trigger and the gun had discharged accidentally when Frank had grabbed her arm. A gun expert examined the gun and found that it was defective and prone to fire when dropped or hit, even without the trigger being pulled, supported this revelation.
888
Rock v Arkansas. Holding?
Does Arkansas’s blanket ban on all hypnotically refreshed testimony infringe on Vickie Rock’s Fourteenth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment right to testify on her own behalf?
Yes. The Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment protect the right of the individual to testify on one’s own behalf at a criminal trial. Because the Arkansas rule was a blanket ban, it did not allow a trial court to consider the particular circumstances of individual cases. Although Arkansas has a state interest in preventing unreliable testimony from being admitted into evidence at trial, that interest does not justify a blanket ban on testimony that may be reliable in an individual case. Therefore the exclusion of the hypnotically refreshed testimony, without exploring the reliability of the testimony, infringed on the petitioner’s Constitutional right to testify in her own defense.
889
Which case held that proceedings under a Sexually Dangerous Persons Act are not criminal within the meaning of the 5th Amendment guarantees?
Allen v Illinois
890
How did Youngberg v Romeo show deference to medical decision-making?
The Court emphasized the need to balance the legitimate interests of both parties involved to determine whether liberty interests were being adequately protected. In the involuntary commitment arena, deference to qualified professionals is necessary because of their specialized knowledge and the specific circumstances and risks inherent in a mental hospital. Therefore, such professionals and institutions can only be held liable for infringements on liberty interests when the decision by a professional is a substantial departure from accepted professional judgment.
891
Which cases addresses the impact of voluntary intoxication on mens rea?
Montana v Egelhoff
892
Some case law shifted to require that the threat be clearly made, and that the duty extended only to reasonably foreseeable victims-not to the general public. Many states subsequently adopted statutes known as “Tarasoff-limiting statutes,” which gave specific criteria (ie, a credible threat made against an identifiable victim). Duty to protect statutes have been passed in all but how many states.
13
893
The 1976 tarasoff decision occurred when?
Before trial on the facts.
894
The durham rule was abandoned in which case?
Brawner v US
895
Malpractice suits against "utilization review" organizations are barred by beneficiaries of ERISA plans because of:
The statutory preemption clause
The federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974 governs the administration of employee benefit plans and is noteworthy in that it includes an extremely broad preemption clause. The preemption clause, which prevents states from regulating these same plans, has often co-existed uneasily with state health care regulation efforts. In 2016, the US Supreme Court allowed the ERISA to be used to shield employer-sponsored health care plans from state health care data transparency efforts.
It is increasingly apparent that the scope of ERISA preemption needs to be curtailed to allow states to continue their traditional role as the regulators of health care. Otherwise, we risk creating a significant “blind spot” when it comes to regulating health insurance for the 60 percent of US workers who receive their health care coverage through employer-sponsored plans.
896
The confidentiality of group therapy was addressed in:
State v Andring
897
The % of states that preclude juries from considering voluntary intoxication as evidence of a mental state (mens rea) for a crime is:
20%
898
USSC held that forcing unwanted psychiatric medication potentially violated patients' rights under which amendment?
14th
899
The All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (federal law passed by Congress) requires all schools that accept federal funds to provide a “free appropriate public education” to all handicapped students. The Act also allows schools discretion in deciding what steps to take to accommodate handicapped students. Case?
Board of Education v Rowley (1982)
900
The Court's decision regarding parental rights was that they may only be terminated by showing "clear and convincing" evidence
Santosky v. Kramer
901
What do Santosky v. Kramer and Addington v Texas have in common?
Held that you must show clear and convincing evidence for termination of parental rights and civil commitment (
902
In People v Stritzinger (Supreme Court of California), Stritzinger had which of his constitutional amendments violated?
Defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation is a fundamental right, applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
The court held that the trial court erred in admitting the psychologist's testimony as to his session with the defendant, because it did not contain any information that the psychologist was required to report under the Act.
903
The court will now have the discretion to raise an insanity defense sua sponte (on its own) only if the defendant is not capable of making, and has not made, an intelligent and voluntary decision.
Frendak v US
904
The Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 did what: (4)
1) Set limits on ultimate issue testimony
2) Set the insanity standard in federal courts
3) Set insanity acquittee release standards
4) Specified burden of proof in insanity trials
905
What was the issue in Frendak v US?
Can an insanity defense be forced upon an unwilling defendant?
906
What is the burden of proof required in the Dusky case for finding incompetence to stand trial?
More likely than not
907
The goal of Congress in passing ERISA was
To protect employee benefits
908
Contract law allows the aggrieved party to recover
such damages as would place him in a position he would have occupied had the contract been performed.
909
Youngberg v Romeo evolved into a USSC case about what?
Right to treatment decision
910
The court maintained that an individual's right to privacy would be violated by "[i]ntrusion into one's intellect" under the circumstances of this case. Citing
recent Supreme Court cases involving privacy, the court stated that the privacy of "mental processes" ranks higher than the right to view obscenity or to use contraceptives.
Kaimowitz v Dept of Mental Health for Michigan
911
Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body. Said by?
Justice Cardozo
912
Procedure for competency to be executed. Case?
Ford v Wainwright
913
Constitutional standard for prison medical care. Case?
Estelle v Gamble
914
Forced meds to make defendant competent to be executed
State v Perry
915
Earliest cognitive insanity test. Case?
Rex v Arnold
916
The Model Penal Code is made up of what two arms?
cognitive and volitional
917
By 1980, approximately half of the states and the federal government adopted what insanity standard? However, in 1982, John Hinckley successfully claimed insanity using this test in his federal trial for the attempted murder of then-President Ronald Reagan. Public indignation at this not-guilty verdict caused many states and the federal government to switch to the more inflexible M’Naghten standard
Substantial capacity test (also called the Model Penal Code or ALI defense)
918
“A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality [wrongfulness] of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law”
(Model Penal Code § 4.01(1)). The defense has two elements. The first element requires the defendant to have a mental disease or defect, like the M’Naghten and irresistible impulse insanity defenses. The second element combines the cognitive standard with volitional, like the irresistible impulse insanity defense supplementing the M’Naghten insanity defense.
919
Why is it easier to establish insanity under the model penal code?
Because both the cognitive and volitional requirements are scaled down to more flexible standards. Unlike the M’Naghten insanity defense, the defendant must lack substantial, not total, capacity. The “wrong” in the substantial capacity test is “criminality,” which is a legal rather than moral wrong. In addition, unlike the irresistible impulse insanity defense, the defendant must lack substantial, not total, ability to conform conduct to the requirements of the law. Another difference in the substantial capacity test is the use of the word “appreciate” rather than “know.” As stated previously, appreciate incorporates an emotional quality, which means that evidence of the defendant’s character or personality is relevant and most likely admissible to support the defense.
920
Early case of irresistible impulse (1877)
Parsons v Alabama
921
Prohibition of ultimate issue testimony
Washington v US (DC Court of Appeals, Bazelon). Experts were given specific instructions, trying to limit weight juries gave to psychiatry testimony
922
Define mental disease or defect for insanity cases
McDonald v US
United States, 312 F. 2d 847 (D.C. Cir. 1962), is a criminal case that defined mental disease or defect as referred to in an insanity defense—"includes any abnormal condition of the mind which substantially affects mental or emotional processes and substantially impairs behavior controls."
923
Criminal case which articulated a product test for an insanity defense.
Pike v New Hampshire
924
Competency to enter a plea same as Dusky standard
Godinez v Moran
925
Statue offenses are not constitutional. Case?
Robinson v CA
926
Rock v Arkansas banned a per se rule barring hypnotically refreshed testimony by defendant on what grounds?
Due process
927
Suppressed hypnotically refreshed identification of defendant and adopted 6 procedural guidelines for hypnosis in court
State v Hurd
928
Addressed informed consent in TD case
Clites v Iowa
929
Defined deliberate indifference
Farmer v Brennan
930
Deliberate indifference by prison personnel to a prisoner's serious illness constitutes cruel and unusual punishment
Estelle v Gamble
931
Criminal trials - standard of proof?
Beyond a reasonable doubt
932
Malpractice lawsuit - standard of proof?
preponderance of the evidence
933
According to Cooper v Oklahoma (1996), what standard of proof was precluded in a hearing on CST?
Clear and convincing evidence
the Court held that because Oklahoma's procedural rule allows the State to try a defendant who is more likely than not incompetent, it violates due process. Justice Stevens wrote for the court that the stringent standard is "incompatible with the dictates of due process," and that criminal defendants must be allowed to avoid trial if they prove incompetence by a "preponderance of the evidence."
934
May state law presume that defendants are competent to stand trial unless they prove their incompetence by clear and convincing evidence without violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Case?
Cooper v Oklahoma
the Court held that because Oklahoma's procedural rule allows the State to try a defendant who is more likely than not incompetent, it violates due process. Justice Stevens wrote for the court that the stringent standard is "incompatible with the dictates of due process," and that criminal defendants must be allowed to avoid trial if they prove incompetence by a "preponderance of the evidence."
935
What was the reasoning for the Court's decision in Robinson v CA?
It was cruel and unusual to punish a defendant for an involuntarily acquired illness such as drug addiction.
936
Nothing could be less fruitful than for this Court to be impelled into defining some sort of insanity test in constitutional terms. Case?
Powell v Texas.
937
Wilson v US is based on what constitutional rights?
5th and 6th
938
In Jackson v Indiana, Theon Jackson raised an equal protection argument that compared himself to which group of people?
Civilly committed patients
939
In Jackson v Indiana, the Court referred to which case in addressing Theon jackson's equal protection claim?
Baxstrom v Herold
940
This was the first insanity case heard at an appellate level.
McNaughtan.
941
The "offspring of a delusion" test for insanity was articulated in which case?
James Hadfield
942
Which case had the first recorded psychiatric testimony at a trial?
Earl Ferres trial
943
Which standard of proof is closest to that required by the McNaughtan standard?
Clear and convincing evidence
944
What principle was articulated in Washington v US?
Psychiatrists may not testify on the ultimate issue in insanity trials.
945
The Supreme Court held that same gender sexual harassment was actionable in:
Oncale v Sundowner
946
In Durham v US, once evidence of a mental illness is introduced by the defense, the prosecution must prove what?
Sanity beyond a reasonable doubt
947
In Jones v US, what group of people did MR. Jones compare himself to in his equal protection claim?
Civilly committed patients
948
The insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 stated that insanity must be proven by what standard?
Clear and convincing evidence
949
The insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 stated what about the role of violent vs non-violent crimes in the decision to release an insanity acquittee.
There is a higher standard to release insanity acquittees who committed violent crimes than for those who committed non-violent crimes.
950
According to Canterbury v Spence, what is the scope of the disclosure to the patient?
What a prudent person would want to know in order to make an intelligent decision about tx.
951
In Foucha v Louisiana, Mr. Foucha compared himself to which group in his equal protections argument?
Convicted prisoners
952
What type of damage - deter others from engaging in similar bx?
Punitive
953
What type of damage - they are not related to the assets of the defendant.
Punitive
954
What type of damage -they are not awarded in cases of ordinary negligence.
Punitive
955
In Jaffe v Redmond, the SC held that psychotherapist-patient privilege was based on what section of the Federal Rules of Evidence?
Section 501
956
The Tarasoff Court relied in part, on which document to establish that a therapist has a duty to protect a third party from the dangerous bx of his/her patient?
Restatement (second) of Torts (1965)
Generally, American tort law does not impose liability on parties for failing to aid or rescue other parties. The Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314 (1965) states: "The fact that the actor realizes or should realize that action on his part is necessary for another's aid or protection does not of itself impose upon him a duty to take such action." However, the law provides narrow exceptions in some instances when parties owe a specific duty to one another, such as when parties have a "special relationship." = patient/therapist
957
Expert testimony may not be required when the practice of a professional is such a gross deviation from ordinary care that:
A lay person could easily recognize it.
958
So long as the environment would reasonably be perceived, and is perceived, as hostile or abusive... there is no need for it also to be psychologically injurious (in order to find that it violates Title VII). Case?
Harris v Forklift
959
A legal proceeding in forma pauperis allows access to the courts for:
indigent petitioners
960
Judge Bazelon opined that the term "product" has no clinical significance to psychiatrists in
Washington v US
961
In Washington v NS, Judge Bazelon cited what two cases in an effort to clarify the Durham decision?
Carter and McDonald
962
In this case, the USSC examined the application of the 8th amendment to medical tx in prison.
Estelle v Gamble
963
USSC stated in Allen v Illinois and Kansas v Hendricks that the purpose of confinement of sexually violent persons is:
Treatment
964
In Farmer v Brennan, the USSC determined that the requisite mens rea of prison officials deliberate indifference to inmate safety is:
recklessly (subjective)
965
Farmer v Brennan, facts?
Dee Farmer, a biological male, underwent estrogen therapy, received silicone breast implants and underwent unsuccessful sex reassignment surgery. Farmer was convicted and sentenced to prison on federal criminal charges. Prison medical personnel diagnosed Farmer as a transsexual. Farmer was generally kept separate from the general male population, in part because of Farmer’s misconduct, but also because of safety concerns.
Farmer was transferred to the U.S. Penitentiary Terre Haute and placed in the general male population in accordance with prison policy. Within two weeks, a cellmate allegedly beat and raped Farmer.
966
Farmer v Brennan, holding?
The Supreme Court held that prison officials may be liable if they showed “deliberate indifference” to a substantial risk of serious harm when the official was subjectively aware of the risk and disregarded it. The Court remanded the case for further consideration of whether prison officials were aware of the risk to Farmer.
967
In this case the plaintiff asserted that his 8th amendment rights were violated because standards of dignity were infringed upon by a requirement to do manual labor, in the face of a known medical condition. Case?
Estelle v Gamble
968
In essence Olmstead v LC addresses
community placement
969
The USSC reasoned in Olmstead v LC what?
Unjustified detention is a form of discrimination
970
The law banning assisted suicide at issue in Washington v Glucksberg was upheld in the face of a constitutional challenge based on the:
Due Process Clause
971
Federal privilege was extended to SWs
Jaffe v Redmond
972
In Rock v Arkansas, the USSC held that Arkansas per se exclusion of hypnotically-enhanced testimony violate which amendments?
5th, 6th, 14th
973
Washington v Glucksberg. Facts?
Dr. Harold Glucksberg -- along with four other physicians, three terminally ill patients who have since died, and a nonprofit organization that counsels individuals contemplating physician assisted-suicide -- brought this suit challenging the state of Washington's ban on physician assisted-suicide. The State of Washington has historically criminalized the promotion of suicide attempts by those who "knowingly cause or aid another person to attempt suicide." Glucksberg alleged that Washington's ban was unconstitutional. Following a District Court ruling favoring Glucksberg and his fellow petitioners, the Ninth Circuit affirmed and the Supreme Court granted Washington certiorari.
974
Washington v Glucksberg. Holding?
Analyzing the guarantees of the Due Process Clause, the Court focused on two primary aspects: the protection of our nation's objective fundamental, historically rooted, rights and liberties; and the cautious definition of what constitutes a due process liberty interest. The Court held that the right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause since its practice has been, and continues to be, offensive to our national traditions and practices. Moreover, employing a rationality test, the Court held that Washington's ban was rationally related to the state's legitimate interest in protecting medical ethics, shielding disabled and terminally ill people from prejudice which might encourage them to end their lives, and, above all, the preservation of human life.
975
In Barefoot v Estelle, the USSC upheld the use of:
Hypothetical questions to psychiatric witnesses.
976
Harper required what standard to medicate after a finding of incompetence to refuse medication?
Substituted judgement standard.
977
The USSC held in Ford v Wainwright that a state may not put to death a prisoner who:
Lacked competence to be executed.
978
The Louisiana Supreme COurt held in State v Perry that it was contrary to the Lousiana constitution for the state to attempt to:
Restore a prisoner to competency for execution by forced medication.
979
Jablonski v US extended the holding in Tarasoff to protect a person who was:
Not a specifically identified victim.
980
Jablonski v US. Facts?
Phillip Jablonski was dating Melinda Kimball and had threatened to kill her and her mother (Isobel Pahls). After one incident that culminated in a threat towards her mother, she took him to the Loma Linda VA Hospital, where the doctor conducted a risk assessment, but did not consult his prior records, which documented a history of violent behavior. Based on this incomplete data, he determined erroneously that Jablonski was not a danger to himself or others and released him. He warned Kimball to leave Jablonski but did not warn her of his potential for violence. When Jablonski was discharged from the hospital, he killed Kimball.
981
Jablonski v US. Holding?
The court ruled that the doctor's failure to secure the patient's previous records constituted negligence, as the information in his files would have affected the risk assessment and thus the actions taken to protect the foreseeable victim.
The legal precedent set by this case extends the duty of the mental health professional to secure previous records when conducting a risk assessment, and the duty to protect to include the involuntary hospitalization of a dangerous individual..
982
In Ford v Wainwright, the USSC cited three deficiencies in the Florida statutory procedures for assessing the competence to be executed.
1) Failure to include the prisoner in the truth-seeking process
2) Denial of any opportunity to challenge or impeach the state-appointed psychiatrist's opinion.
3) Placement of the competency to be executed wholly within the executive branch.
983
According to Farmer v Brennan, the determination of "deliberate indifference" must include:
Both knowledge and disregard of a substantial risk of serious harm.
984
Landeros v Flood illustrates the general rule that in a lawsuit, medical malpractice must be established by:
Expert witness testimony
985
USSC held in Deshaney v Winnebago County Dept of SS that the Dept's failure to provide the child with adequate protection against his father's violence was not a violate of what?
Substantive component of the due process clause.
The Due Process Clause does not impose a special duty on the State to provide services to the public for protection against private actors if the State did not create those harms. "The Clause is phrased as a limitation on the State's power to act, not as a guarantee of certain minimal levels of safety and security; while it forbids the State itself to deprive individuals of life, liberty, and property without due process of law, its language cannot fairly be read to impose an affirmative obligation on the State to ensure that those interests do not come to harm through other means."
986
In Daubert v Merrell Dow, what was the District COurt ruling?
Granted summary judgement
987
In People v Stritzinger, an exception to physician-patient privilege exists in the physician's obligation to:
Report child abuse
988
In what case did the Supreme Court of Minnesota extended a patient's privilege to group psychotherapy sessions. The court stated that mandatory child abuse reporting statutes could abrogate the privilege to the extent that only information required in a maltreatment report is admitted into evidence.
State v. Andring, 342 N.W.2d 128 (Minn. 1984),
989
The origin of the right to psychiatric tx is most fairly attributed to:
Dr. Morton Birnbaum
990
The State v Andring Court held that group therapy was within the scope of the psychotherapist-patient privilege because:
Group participants are part of the diagnostic and therapeutic process for co-participants.
991
USSC held in Deshaney v Winnebago County Dept of SS that the state may have acquired a duty under what law to provide the victim of abuse with adequate protection?
State Tort Law
992
In Deshaney v Winnebago County Dept of SS the dissent argued:
The child protective agency effectively confined the abused child back to the violent home, which is analogous to the state's restraint of an individual's freedom in Youngberg v Romeo and Estelle v Gamble
993
The concept of res ipsa loquitur is most relevant to what type of law?
Tort law
994
USSC rejected Farmer's claim of an 8th amendment violation because:
cruel and unusual conditions do not equate to cruel and unusual punishment.
A prison official may be held liable under the Eighth Amendment for acting with "deliberate indifference" to inmate health or safety only if he knows that inmates face a substantial risk of serious harm and disregards that risk by failing to take reasonable measures to abate it.
(a) Prison officials have a duty under the Eighth Amendment to provide humane conditions of confinement. They must ensure that inmates receive adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care, and must protect prisoners from violence at the hands of other prisoners. However, a constitutional violation occurs only where the deprivation alleged is, objectively, "sufficiently serious."
995
Under current ERISA standards, a claim against an HMO is usually limited to:
Benefits due under the plan
996
Without a patient's consent, confidential communications can be shared with who?
Consultatnt
997
Sue sponte
On its own motion
998
a preliminary examination of a witness or a juror by a judge or counsel.
voir dire
999
He said it himself
Ipsi dixit
1000
the thing speaks for itself
res ipsa loquitur
1001
produce the body
habeas corpus
1002
in the absence of one party
ex parte
1003
ex post facto
law passed after a crime
1004
precludes need for expert testimony
res ipsa loquitur
1005
Foreseeability required
proximate cause
1006
A theory of right to tx
Quid pro quo
1007
Missing in automatism
Actus reus
1008
Case? The Kansas Supreme Court held that the SVPA was unconstitutional when applied to an individual who has only an emotional disorder rather than a volitional impariement.
Kansas v Crane
1009
Under this Act any person who, due to "mental abnormality" or "personality disorder", is likely to engage in "predatory acts of sexual violence" can be indefinitely confined.
Kansas's Sexually Violent Predator Act (Act).
1010
According to the Federal Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984, who has the burden of proving an insanity defense and by what standard?
Defendant by clear and convincing evidence
1011
The Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C. § 4243 (1984)) required federal insanity acquittees who were found NGRI of an offense involving “bodily injury” or “serious” property damage to prove by ______ evidence that release would not “create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to the property … due to a present mental disease or defect.” With respect to all other offenses, the burden of proof is on the acquittee, by preponderance of the evidence.
clear and convincing
1012
The Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C. § 4243 (1984)) required federal insanity acquittees who were found NGRI of an offense involving “bodily injury” or “serious” property damage to prove by clear and convincing evidence that release would not “create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to the property … due to a present mental disease or defect.” With respect to all other offenses, the burden of proof is on the acquittee, by _____
preponderance of the evidence.
1013
What standard did the Superior Court of NJ rule in 1980 was necessary to show that hypnotically induced recollections were sufficiently reliable to be admissible in court by the state?
Clear and convincing (State v Hurd)
1014
Harm caused to a child by a parent does not indicate a violation of the substantive due process clause of the 14th amendment because:
the state is not the cause of the harmful action.
1015
Which constitutional amendment requires that a prisoner has a right to a hearing before he is transferred to a psychiatric hospital?
14th amendment due process clause
1016
The teen does not have a right to a hearing as long as there is a "neutral fact finder" and no state laws to the contrary. Case?
Parham v JR and JL
1017
Cruzan, the USSC ruled that the state's standard for proving an incompetent person's wish to withdraw life sustaining tx was not unconstitutional. Standard?
Clear and convincing.
1018
In Santosky v Kramer, the correct minimal standard for terminating parental rights is clear and convincing evidence. Which constitutional amendment did the Court refer to in making their decision?
14th
1019
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, may an expert answer the ultimate question?
Yes, except on the insanity defense in federal trials.
1020
Dusky standard?
Does the accused have sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and does he have a rational and a factual understanding of the proceedings against him.
1021
Is the Dusky standard used in federal trials today? No. It was superseded by what?
Different wording in the 1984 Federal Insanity Defense Reform ACt.
1022
According to Jackson v Indiana, what happens if a person is not restorable?
Civil commitment proceedings must be initiated or the person must be released.
1023
Burden of production and persuasion according to Durham?
Defense has the burden of production and the prosecution has the burden of persuasion beyond a reasonable doubt to prove sanity.
1024
What insanity test most closely foreshadowed the Durham rule?
Pike v New Hampshire
1025
What case decision was an effort to curtail psychiatric conclusory testimony which usurped the role of the jury?
Brawner (1972).
1026
Contrast the Whalen rule with the Frendak rule.
Under Whalen, the trial judge was required to interpose an insanity defense when there was sufficient question as to the defendant's mental responsibility at the time of the crime. The Frendak court focused not on the validity of the insanity defense, but on the defendant's ability to make an intelligent choice about raising an insanity defense.
1027
What is the impact of the decision in Godinez v Moran (1993) on the Frendak (1979) decision?
Since the Godinez states that the Dusky standard is sufficient to waive counsel the Supreme Court may now believe that once an insanity defense is voluntarily and intelligently waived the trial court should not impose an NGRI on an unwilling defendant.
Realistically, because of the Supreme Court's holding in Godinez v. Moran, it is most likely that the court would hold that if a defendant is competent to stand trial, then he is also competent to waive the insanity defense, as the two competencies are equivalent.
(The Frendak rationale, that a judge may not impose a sanity defense over the objections of the defendant, has been used mostly in federal cases. Some states have endorsed less elaborate procedures. For example, if a judge rules that the waiver of the insanity defense is not voluntary and informed, yet nonetheless the defense is imposed over the defendant's objections, then a separate counsel must be appointed to argue issues pertaining to insanity issues, while the defendant's counsel presents the arguments the defendant desires)
1028
Contrast the reasoning in Jones v US with Addington v Texas.
Addington v Texas = clear and convincing, burden on state.
Jones v US = the criminal act was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, thus it is not a prediction but a fact. Burden of proof can therefore be shifted to the insanity acquittee w/o violating equal protection clause. defendant put forth his mental illness. Release not mentally ill or dangerous, clear and convincing for capital cases, preponderance of the evidence for less.
1029
Burden of proof and standard in insanity cases?
Defense by clear and convincing
1030
The Louisiana scheme for release of insanity acquittees before Foucha and Louisiana violated what constitutional provisions?
1) Equal protections = insanity acquittees who are no longer mentally ill are tx'd differently than criminals who have completed their prison terms if dangerousness is the only criteria holding them.
2) Substantive due process = violated Jackson requirement that the nature of commitment bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is committed.
1031
What language from Jones v US was interpreted in Foucha?
That an insanity acquittee may not be held unless he is both mentally ill and dangerous.
1032
What action did the USSC take in State v Perry?
Remanded case back to the lower court to review in view of Washington v Harper.
1033
What did the Louisiana Supreme Court conclude in State v Perry?
Involuntary antipsychotic medication to make a convict competent to be executed violated Louisiana's constitution.
1034
In Baxstrom v Herold, what constitutional right was invoked?
14th amendment equal protections
1035
What was the reasoning in Vitek v Jones which protected prisoners against transfer to a psychiatric hospital w/o a due process hearing?
The stigma of being a hospitalized psychiatric patient and the bx modification programs were protected by a separate liberty interest.
1036
Why is cross-examination compromised in a subject whose memory has been hypnotically refreshed?
The witness often becomes convinced of the truthfulness of his memory to an extreme degree (memory hardening).
1037
What two legal principles underlie civil commitment?
Police powers
| Parens patriae
1038
Which legal principle of civil commitment was emphasized in Lessard v Schmidt?
Police power
1039
"experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent... The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning, but without understanding." Case and justice?
Lessard v Schmidt, Justice Brandeis
1040
What does "quid pro quo" mean in the right to tx?
Exchange tx for loss of liberty in involuntary confinement
1041
What is the origin of the constitutional right to privacy?
```
1st
4th
5th
9th
14th amendments
Penumbras of the Bill of Rights
```
1042
What equal protection argument was raised in the Lifeschutz case?
Comparison of psychiatrist-patient to priest-penitent privilege.
1043
Two types of privacy involved in constitutional law.
1) individual interest in avoiding disclosure of personal matters
2) interest in independence in making certain kinds of important decisions
1044
Under worker's comp, is the employee entitled to compensation for pain and suffering?
NO
1045
Zone of danger in psychic injury cases?
The physical area in which physical harm might occur to the plaintiff.
1046
In what two cases did the trial court diss for lacking a cause of action (demurrer)?
Landeros v Flood
| Tarasoff
1047
Was the Rouse v Cameron decision about right to tx bottomed on a constitutional right to tx?
No, on a DC statute.
1048
In Youngberg v Romeo, what constitutional amendment was the USSC's decision based on?
14th, due process
(1) Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment grant an involuntarily committed patient the right to safe confinement? YES
(2) Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment grant an involuntarily committed patient the right to freedom from bodily restraints? YES
(3) Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment grant an involuntarily committed patient the right to adequate habilitation? unanswered
The Court declined to answer whether the Fourteenth Amendment includes a stand-alone right to adequate habilitation, or how to determine the level of habilitation required to protect other liberty interests under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court emphasized the need to balance the legitimate interests of both parties involved to determine whether liberty interests were being adequately protected. In the involuntary commitment arena, deference to qualified professionals is necessary because of their specialized knowledge and the specific circumstances and risks inherent in a mental hospital.
1049
In what sense did the Youngberg Court say there was a right to tx?
Only for sufficient habilitation to provide physical safety and freedom from restraints.
1050
Did the Washington v harper decision favor doctors or judges as medication decision-makers?
Doctors
1051
Substantive due process issue in Washington v Harper?
What factual circumstances must exist before the state may administer antipsychotic meds to a prisoner against his will
1052
Procedural due process issue in Washington v Harper?
Whether the state's non-judicial mechanisms used to determine the facts in a particular case are sufficient.
1053
What case enunciated the "reasonable medical practitioner" standard?
Natanson v Kline, 1960
1054
What is the Canterbury v Spence standard?
Materiality of the information standard: what an average pt would be entitled to know in a given situation, based on the law of reason, not a standard set by the medical profession for itself.
1055
Did the Cruzan court acknowledge a competent person's right to die by rejecting hydration and nutrition?
YES
1056
What are the three elements of informed consent?
Competence
Information
Voluntariness
1057
Who has the burden of proof in a malpractice case?
Plaintiff by a preponderance of the evidence
1058
Name three cases that involve violations of 6th amendment rights.
Rock v Arkansas
Wilson v US
Estelle v Smith
1059
Under common law, does a person have a duty to prevent a third party from causing physical injury to another?
No, with the exception of when a special relationship exists
1060
In Lipari v Sears, why did the US Federal District Court consider relevant Nebraska law>
Federal courts rely on local state law in making decisions under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
1061
In Dillon v Legg, what was the distinction between the mother and daughter who both witnessed the MVA and death of the victim?
The daughter was in the zone of danger for physical risk
1062
Issues in Payne v Tennessee? (3)
1) whether 8th amendment erects a per se bar prohibiting a capital sentencing jury from considering victim impact evidence
2) precluding a prosecutor from arguing such evidence at a capital sentencing hearing
3) Stare decisis
1063
In DeShaney v Winnebago County DSS, Joshua DeShaney alleged that which of his constitutional rights were violated?
Substantive Due process Clause of the 14th amendment
1064
The eggshell plaintiff rule does not apply to what in a sexual harassment case, but it does apply to damages.
Liability.
A defendant is not automatically liable if a hypersensitive plaintiff takes offense to a sexual cue to which a reasonable person of the same gender would not have taken offense.
1065
What are some differences between sexual harassment and traditional torts?
In traditional unintentional torts, a negligence standard requires that a plaintiff must have suffered some harm. In sexual harassment claims, neither ecomonic nor emotional harm is necessary.
1066
If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.
Federal Rule 702
1067
What is summary judgement?
Judge's dismissal of a case as a matter of law because no material facts are at issue.
1068
Plaintiffs in Washington v Glucksberg claimed what?
A liberty interest protected by 14th Amendment Due Process allows personal choice for physician assisted suicide.
1069
Legal pitfalls for testimony retrieved hypnotically? (3)
Suggestibility
Confabulation
Memory hardening
1070
State v Hurd, New Jersey Supreme Court, 1980. Ruling?
State must show reliability of the recollections on a cases by case basis for determination of admissibiity
1071
State v Hurd, Dr. Orne's safeguards? (6)
1) psychiatrist or psychologist
2) independence of hypnotist
3) Police info for hypnotist should be written
4) Obtain detailed description before hypnosis
5) Record all sessions
6) only hypnotist and subject should be present
Dr. Orne stated that it was essential that the subjects statements be independently verified before they can be accepted as reliable
1072
State v Hurd, Facts?
Jane Sell was attacked in her home, did not remember her attacker
Suggestive hypnotic session with detective and doctor.
due process rights of defendant violated
1073
Rock v Arkansas, USSC, 1987. Facts?
Vickie Rock shot and killed her husband, could not recall details, underwent hypnosis, new recollection that gun misfired, gun expert confirmed gen defective
1074
Rock v Arkansas, holding?
Arkansas per se rule excluding hypnotically refreshed testimony violated defendant's constitutional rights
The Arkansas rule fails because it does not allow the trial court even to consider post-hypnotic recollections and effectively prevented Mrs Rock from describing the events of the shooting at all.
1075
Rock v Arkansas, amendments violated? (3)
5th: right to testify on one's own behalf
6th: right to call witnesses
14th: due process right to offer testimony
1076
This case helped remove many status crimes such as homelessness and vagrancy from statutes.
Robinson v California, USSC, 1962
1077
USSC found that the California statute in Robinson v CA violated which amendment?
8th
1078
What was the issue in Powell v Texas? (Defendant was arguing which amendment was violated?)
The issue was whether the 14th amendment prohibited states from criminalizing public intoxication as either a "status" or as a bx that was a non-volitional result of a disease.
1079
In Montana v Egelhoff, what did Mr. Egelhoff argue?
He claimed that Montana's law requiring that the jury not consider the defendant's intoxication in determining the existence of his mens rea was unconstitutional.
USSC ruled that it was constitutional.
1080
In Washington v Glucksberg, the state's ban on assisted suicide does not violate what amendment?
The Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment
The Court did not find that there was a constitutionally protected liberty interest in physician-assisted suicide.
1081
Hypnosis causes greater confidence in both true and false memories without greater accurary
Memory hardening
1082
According to the USSC, which parties to a criminal proceeding must be allowed to present their hypnotically refreshed memories in testimony?
All defendants
1083
What was the issue in Montana v Egelhoff? (Defendant was arguing which amendment was violated?)
Whether the due process clause of the 14th amendment is violated by the Montana Code.
NO
1084
The right to have a jury consider evidence of voluntary intoxication in determining whether an accused possessed the mental state required for conviction was not a "fundamental principle of justice." Case?
Montana v Egelhoff, USSC, 1996
1085
The due process clause specially protects what?
those fundamental rights and liberties which are objectively deeply rooted in the nation's hx and traditions
1086
What case upheld the laws banning PAS but also could not prevent states from legalizing PAS.
Washington v Glucksberg
1087
The essence of substantive due process is:
Protection of a person's life, liberty, or property from arbitrary and unreasonable government action. The government must act with fundamental fairness.
1088
State v Hurd, holding?
The Court stated that the burden of proof should be on the state by clear and convincing evidence to show that hypnotically-induced recollections are sufficiently reliable to permit introduction at trial.
