Board exam Flashcards
Hierarchy of Authority: Constitution trumps?
Statues.
Hierarchy of Authority: Constitution trumps statues, statues trump?
Court decisions.
Definition of dicta?
Portions of court opinions that go beyond the facts. They are not binding in subsequent cases.
Is dicta binding in subsequent cases?
NO. Dicta = Portions of court opinions that go beyond the facts. They are not binding in subsequent cases.
Matters of Fact are determined by who?
Trier of fact (jury or judge if jury is waived).
Definition of “matter of law?”
Whatever is to be decided by the application of statutory rules or the principles of law.
Matter of law is decided by who?
Judge. Whatever is to be decided by the application of statutory rules or the principles of law.
Definition of “demurrer?”
Court dismissals - no cause of action
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.
Summary judgement.
The appellate courts distinguish between what types of errors?
Harmless vs reversible.
Writ challenging whether a prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
Habeas corpus
Definition of habeas corpus.
Writ challenging whether a prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
Standard of proof: Civil commitment?
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
Standard of proof: Termination of parental rights?
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
Standard of proof: Competence to end life support?
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
Standard of proof: Deportation; denaturalization?
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
Standard of proof: 75%
Clear and convincing evidence (75%).
Standard of proof: 51%
Preponderance of the evidence
Standard of proof: over 90%
Beyond a reasonable doubt
Standard of Proof: Probable cause?
<50%
Reasonable belief
Objective standard
Standard of Proof: Reason to believe?
Honest belief, subjective standard
1st amendment?
Freedom of speech
Freedom of speech. Amendment?
1st
5th amendment?
Right not to incriminate self.
Right not to incriminate self. Amendment?
5th
6th amendment?
Assistance of counsel.
Assistance of counsel. Amendment?
6th
14th amendment? (2 parts)
Due process and equal protection
Due process and equal protection. Amendment?
14th
8th amendment?
Cruel and unusual punishment.
Cruel and unusual punishment. Amendment?
8th
14th amendment. Due process is divided into 2 parts. What are they?
Substantive and procedural.
Matthews v. Eldridge, 1976. Found?
Due process protections must balance.
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
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
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
Define subpoena duces tecum.
Command to appear and bring all specified records.
2 components of a crime?
1) actus reus (forbidden act)
2) mens rea (guilty intent)
4 types of mens rea (guilty intent):
1) purposely
2) knowingly
3) recklessly
4) negligently
Mens rea (guilty intent): actor consciously disregarded the risk. Type?
Recklessly
Mens rea (guilty intent): actor should have been aware of the risk.
Negligently
List types of affirmative defenses (5)
1) self defense
2) duress
3) entrapment
4) insanity
5) necessity
Which three types of law fall under “quasi-criminal” (to rehabilitate)?
1) Civil commitment
2) juvenile delinquency
3) sexually violent predators
Legal citation (3)
1) volume #
2) name of periodical
3) page number
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.)
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.
Does habeas corpus address a prisoner’s guilty or innocence?
NO. only whether the prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
Habeas corpus addresses what?
Whether the prisoner is restrained by proper due process.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Due process is guaranteed to federal defendants through which amendment?
5th
Due process is guaranteed to state defendants through which amendment?
14th
Which amendment provides for “right to assistance of counsel?”
6th
“Similarly situated classes must be treated similarly.” Amendment?
14th - equal protections.
14th amendment, due process, what type demands “fundamental fairness?”
Substantive due process.
The determination of what process is due requires a careful assessment of competing interests. Which case?
Matthews v Eldridge (1976) USC.
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.
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
The right for privacy is derived from which amendments? (5)
1st 3rd 4th 5th 9th
42 USC 1983 refers to what?
Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
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
What is a tort?
A civil wrong
Define tort law.
An effort to make the injured party whole again, usually through the means of financial restitution.
Define intentional tort.
Acts done with the prior knowledge by the wrong-doer that damage may result.
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
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
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.
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
Define respondiat superior.
Doctors may be held liable for acts of their employees.
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
What two things are required for “specific intent” for mens rea - negligently?
1) Not criminal unless by statute
2) No intent to do harm
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
For affirmative defenses (self-defense, duress, insanity, automatism, entrapment, necessity) - the burden of proof falls on who?
Defendant
Can you use an affirmative defense like duress for murder?
NO
Stranded in the snow, must break into vacant cabin to survive - what defense could you use?
Necessity (affirmative defense)
Legal citations are in the following order: (3)
Volume #, name of periodical, page number
Standard of proof in civil trials?
Preponderance of the evidence
Amendment in Ford v Wainwright?
8th
Which type of dismissal by a court is for insufficient cause for action?
Demurrer
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
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): what is the standard?
The objective standard: what a reasonable person would find objectionable
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.
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.
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.
The “foreseeability” or “relative bystander” test was first recognized in what California SC case?
Dillon v. Legg
In Dillon v Legg (CA SC) - what test was first recognized?
“Foreseeability” or “relative bystander” test
“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.
In workers comp cases the worker must show that he or she has suffered an injury or disability that affects what?
Earning power.
Workers comp case: burden of proof?
Claimant
Workers comp case: standard of proof?
Preponderance of the evidence
Example of physical mental claim in a workers comp case:
Rape at work leads to PTSD
Example of mental physical claim in a workers comp case:
A long period of emotional strain at work leads to a heart attack
In a workers comp case is fault needed?
No (in tort law YES!)
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
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
Concerns about the Rey 1 memory test for cognitive malingering?
no single cut off score for malingering and lacks consistent administration guidelines
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
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.
Recognition memory is better or worse than recall memory with feigned memory loss?
WORSE
VRAG, HCR-20, COVR - which structured instrument is actuarial?
VRAG (violence risk appraisal guide)
What type of delusions are more likely to be acted on than any other type of delusion?
Persecutory
What is the single best predictor of future violence?
Past violence
What type of violence is the hallmark of psychopathic character?
Predatory, dangerous b/c there are no bxs that foreshadow it.
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
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)
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
In this case, the hx of recovery for negligent infliction of emotional damages (NIED) is reviewed.
Dillon v. Legg (CA SC)
Foreseeability standard? Landmark case?
Dillon v. Legg (CA SC)
Activity limitations and/or participation restrictions in an individual with a health condition, disorder, or disease.
Disability.
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.
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.
Pays benefits to workers who have qualified for coverage (usually by working) and who have become disabled.
SSDI (Social security disability insurance).
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).
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.
Does ADA offer protection for personality disorders?
YES.
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.
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
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.
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).
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.
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.
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
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.
Based on needs determination: SSI or SSDI?
SSI
Administered by the Social Security Administration: SSI or SSDI?
Both
History of contributions via FICA: SSI or SSDI?
SSDI
Work-related injury: SSI or SSDI?
Neither
Minimum income: SSI or SSDI?
SSI
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
The case of school board v Arline has has had a significant influence on cases involving?
HIV
In essence Olmstead v LC addresses?
community placement
What % of persons evaluated for disability are malingering?
30%
Voluntary production or exaggeration of sxs in pursuit of an easily identified goal.
Malingering.
Voluntary production of sxs to assume “patient” role and is not otherwise understandable in view of the individual’s environmental circumstances.
Factitious disorder.
What is more common in schizophrenia - AH or VH?
AH 66%
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)
Parole is defined as a period of conditional supervised release following what?
A prison term.
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.
Fastest growing prison population?
Women
There are __x more individuals with SMI in prisons and jails than in state psychiatric hospitals.
10
Most common dx in both male and female offenders in a correctional setting?
Substance use
In which correctional setting is suicide most prevalenc?
Lockup suicides are much greater than jail or prison suicides.
Most common method of suicide in correctional facilities?
Hanging.
Leading cause of local jail inmate deaths?
Suicide
Age at highest risk for jail suicide?
Bimodal distribution. < 18 and > 55.
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.
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
Do individuals with ID have a constitutional right to rehabilitation in prison?
NO
What is the most important service element in correctional mental health?
Screening
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
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
Because a tort action seeks only damages, it is filed in which court?
State, unless it involves a federal institution.
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.
State prison inmates can sue for violations under what?
ADA
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)
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)
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.
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
ADA and direct threat?
Program access is not required when it poses a direct threat to the heath or safety of others.
Expanded the court’s ability to sua sponte (on its own) dismiss prisoner’s civil complaints.
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PRLA)
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)
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.
____ has been interpreted by courts as the constitutional standard regarding the tx of pretrial detainees.
The due process clause of the 14th amendment.
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.
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.
Turner test is related to what amendment?
1st amendment
Turner test is applied when?
In determining whether a regulation violated a prisoner’s constitutional rights.
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.
What amendment has served as the origin for the right to treatment for prisoners?
8th Amendment
The 8th Amendment gives who in the correctional system a constitutional right to medical care?
CONVICTED prisoners
Which landmark case set the standard for provision of medical care in the incarcerated population?
Estelle v Gamble, USSC, 1976
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.
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
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.
When a person knows and is aware of a situation, which he/she disregards.
Subjective recklessness.
When a person knows and is aware of a situation, which he/she disregards.
Subjective (criminal) recklessness.
Which landmark case clarified the mens rea required for the establishment of deliberate indifference?
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994
Which landmark case clarified the mens rea required for the establishment of deliberate indifference?
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994
Subjective/criminal recklessness
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.
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
Farmer v. Brennan, USSC, 1994 - clarified the mens rea required for the establishment of deliberate indifference?
Subjective/criminal recklessness
Landmark case that examined under what conditions antipsychotic medications could be administered against an inmate’s will.
Washington v Harper, USSC, 1990
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.
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”).
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.
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.
Vitek v Jones, USSC, 1980. Which arm of the 14th Amendment?
Due process clause
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.
Baxstrom v Herald, USSC, 1960. Which arm of the 14th Amendment?
Equal protection clause.
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.
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
Farmer v Brennan established what as the mens rea for deliberate indifference?
subjective recklessness
In which landmark case did the USSC state that an inmate’s equal protection rights were violated?
Baxstrom v Herald
What is the most common dx among inmates?
Drug/alcohol abuse or dependence
What principle governs the tx of pretrial detainees regarding medical care?
Due process
When are jail suicides most likely to occur?
Evenly distributed from the first few days of confinement to over several months of confinement.
Which act increased the ability of the court to dismiss claims filed by prisoners?
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
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
Which Standards offer accreditation regarding care provided in a correctional facility? (3)
NCCHC
JCAHO
ACA
Which landmark case provided guidelines of planning mental health services in a correctional facility?
Ruiz v Estelle
Which landmark case set guidelines regarding the transfer of an inmate from a correctional facility to a psychiatric facility?
Vitek v Jones
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.
Define special master.
An individual appointed in prison condition cases to oversee court mandated remedial measures.
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
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
Which act delineates the role of special masters?
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
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
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
What is the most important service element in correctional settings?
Screening
The sign considered pathognomonic for Ganser syndrome?
Approximate answers (2+2=5)
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.
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.
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.
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
Court of Appeals routinely equated deliberate indifference to?
Recklessness
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.
Which landmark case dealt with due process rights of sex offenders?
Specht v Patterson
Which landmark case dealt with due process rights of persons found incompetent to stand trial?
Jackson v. Indiana
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.).
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
In which case did the Court articulate the concept of individualized treatment plans?
Rouse v Cameron, DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 1966.
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.
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.
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
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…
The confinement must bear some relationship to the purpose of commitment, which is tx. Case?
Jackson v. Indiana
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).
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.
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982. Holding?
Mr. Romeo did have constitutionally protected liberty interests under the due process clause of the 14th amendment.
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.
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.
This model of addressing tx refusal focuses on the tx needs of the patient.
Treatment/needs-driven model.
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.
Rennie v Klein, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1983. Model?
Treatment/needs-driven model.
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.
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.
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.
This model of addressing tx refusal focuses on rights of the patient to refuse tx.
“Rights driven” model
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.”
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
Under this model, the court must find the person incompetent for decision-making as a condition for commitment.
Utah model
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
Who first proposed a constitutional protected right to tx in the U.S.?
Morton Birnbaum
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.
In judicial reviews of tx refusals, tx refusals on average last for how many days prior to a judicial override?
13 days
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.
First significant right to treat case?
Rouse v Cameron.
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.
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
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
In O’Connor v DOnaldson (1975), did the USSC accept the quid pro quo theory?
NO
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
First USSC decision that directly addressed the question of whether tx and habilitation are constitutional imperatives.
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982
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
Which case ensures that only egregious cases are likely to be filed regarding tx?
Youngberg v Romeo, USSC, 1982.
“Professional judgement” rule.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This case had a chilling effect on prison research.
Kaimowitz v Michigan Dept of MH, Michigan Circuit Court, 1973.
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.
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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)
Sell v US, USSC, 2003. Sell pled guilty with what type of plea?
Alford plea (pleading guilty while protesting one’s innocence).
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.
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.
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.
Which case decided the standard of proof for termination of life?
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Dept of health, USSC, 1990.
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.
Most common form of reported abuse?
Neglect (~75%)
What age group has the highest victimization rate for child abuse?
0-1
The focus of termination of a parental right evaluation is what?
Parenting capacity.
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
Child witness testimony - define reliability.
Reflects the accuracy of a child’s statement.
Child witness testimony - reliability, assess what two things?
Memory and suggestibility
Reporting a memory requires three components:
1) Encoding the experience (creating the memory)
2) Storing the memory
3) Retrieving the memory
Memory error - error of omission.
Failure to recall or endorse an event that actually occurred.
Memory error - error of commission.
Endorsement of having experienced something that did not occur.
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).
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.
Omission errors are more common in _____, but commission errors are generally rare and do not differ with age.
Preschoolers.
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.
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.
Child witness testimony - Manny Morales Study. Take away?
Social influence and reinforcement = more powerful determinants of children’s answers than simple suggestive questions.
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%
Child witness testimony - suggestive interviewing techniques can result in false beliefs, which can be long lasting. True or False?
True.
Define credibility.
Believability of witness testimony.
The landmark article that identified the “Battered Child Syndrome” was written by?
Dr. Henry Kempe
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
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
A federal statue that created the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect.
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
Most common type of child physical abuse injury?
skin injuries
Child abuse perpetrators - % women and men?
54.1% women
45% men
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.
Case? The California Supreme Court held that physicians were expected to diagnose child abuse.
Landeros v Flood.
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
The standard of proof required for termination of parental rights is:
Clear and convincing
What rule abolished the special requirement that children be shown competent to testify.
601
Landeros v Flood, California Supreme Court, 1976. Holding?
Physicians are expected to dx battered children.
In what case what the general standard for medical malpractice given?
Landeros v Flood, California Supreme Court, 1976.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Roper v Simmons, USSC, 2005. Facts?
Simmons murdered Shirley Cook, when he was 17 years old. Simmons was sentenced to death.
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.
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.
What is the national standard for competency to be sentenced?
There is no national standard.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
The 8th Amendment prohibits execution of the insane. Case?
Ford w Wainwright
The execution of the mentally retarded is unconstitutional. Case?
Atkins v Virginia
Juvenile death penalty violates the 8th amendment. Case?
Roper v Simmons
Which case dealt with psychiatrist’s ability to predict future dangerousness at capital sentencing hearings based on hypothetical questions?
Barefoot v Estelle
The Council of Ethical and Judicial Affairs states what about physicians and executions?
Prohibits attending, observing, or witnessing executions as a physician.
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
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
Panetti v Quarterman, USSC, 2007. The USSC cited their prior ruling in which case?
Ford v Wainwright.
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.
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.
How should intellectual disability be defined in order to implement the principles and holding in Atkins v Virginia? Case?
Hall v Florida, USSC, 2014
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.
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.
Standard of poor required for deciding child custody is?
Preponderance of the evidence.
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
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.
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)
Which child custody standard advanced the concept of psychological parent?
The least detrimental alternative standard.
In which case did the USSC hold that the Washington State Statue allowing anyone to petition for visitation rights was unconstitutional?
Troxel v Granville
The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act authorizes what?
The issuance of federal warrants for unlawful flights to avoid prosecution in parental abduction cases.
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.
Issue: What is the standard to determine custody of a child? Case?
Painter v Bannister, Supreme Court of Iowa, 1966.
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.
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.
Issue: What is the constitutionally required burden of proof for termination of parental rights? Case?
Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982.
Santosky v Kramer, USSC, 1982. Holding?
The burden of proof is clear and convincing evidence on the state.
Title 12 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits what?
Employment discrimination based on sex, race, national origin, and religion.
The “reasonable woman” standard was articulated in what case?
Ellison v Brady
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
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.
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.
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.
Issue: (2) When should employers be held liable if they lack notification about alleged sexual harassment? Case?
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
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.
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.
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.
Which case addressed “welcomeness” in sexual harassment cases?
Meritor Savings Bank v Vinson, USSC, 1986.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If the issue of emancipation of a minor is disputed, the burden of proof is on who?
the party wishing to establish emancipation.
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)
Define age of consent.
Often refers to age minor can consent to sexual intercourse. It is 16 in many states.
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.
Research has shown that __ year-olds do not differ significantly from adults in making decisions about hypothetical treatment situations.
14
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
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.
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
The case resulting in the criminalization of juvenile court.
In re Gault, USSC, 1967.
The standard of proof in all delinquency adjudications should be?
Beyond a reasonable doubt (In re Winship, USSC, 1970)
Which act established the :sight and sound separation” clause?
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (1974)
What happens in a consent decree in juvenile court?
Probation, dismissal or some other sanction. 44% of cases are handled this way.
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.
Juvenile court equivalent for being found guilty.
Adjudicated delinquent.
Standard of proof for statue offenders in juvenile court?
Beyond a reasonable doubt or a lower standard in some cases (preponderance of the evidence).
Diagnosis that is the strongest predictor of juvenile justice involvement?
Conduct disorder.
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.
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.
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.
Miller v Alabama, USSC, 2012. Facts?
Miller beat his neighbor and set fire to his trailer. The neighbor died.
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.
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.
