Chapter 5

Question 1

Adjudicative competence

Answer 1

The ability to participate in variety of legal proceedings, including plea bargaining and participating in a criminal trail

Question 2

Aggravating factors

Answer 2

Circumstances surrounding a crime that heighten its seriousness for purposes of sentencing. An example would be an excessively heinous or cruel method of carrying out a crime, such as a torture murder

Question 3

Beyond a reasonable doubt

Answer 3

The burden of proof that must be met by the government in all criminal cases

Question 4

Clear and convincing evidence

Answer 4

Legal standard acheived when the truth of the facts asserted is highly probably but does not reach the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt

Question 5

Competency restoration

Answer 5

The treatment given to someone found incompent to stand trail for the specific purpose of rendering the person competent to be tried

Question 6

Competency Screening Test (CST)

Answer 6

Sentence-completion examination intended to provide a quick assessment of a defendant’s competency to stand trial. The test taps the defendants knowledge about the role of the lawyer and the rudiments of the court process

Question 7

Competency to stand trail

Answer 7

The legal standard that requires that criminal defendants be able to understand and appreciate criminal charges and help their attorneys in preparing a defense

Question 8

Conditional release

Answer 8

Judical or administrative release from an instiutional setting (jail, prison, psychiatric hospital) on the condition that one demonstrates good behaviour in the community or participates in mental health treatment

Question 9

Criminal responsibility evaluations

Answer 9

Assessment designed to determine whether a defense of insanity can be supported. Also called “metal state at time of offense” evaluation of “insanity” evaluation

Question 10

Death penalty mitigation

Answer 10

In captial cases, attempts by the defense team to reduce or avoid the sentence of death for their client based on factors that lessen the offenders culpability. Examples of mitigating factors are the offender’s age and a history of child abuse

Question 11

Duel-purpose evaluations

Answer 11

Assessment of both a defendant’s competency to stand trail and criminal responsibility during the same evaluation. Dual-purpose evaluations are highly discouraged in legal and psychological literature but still occurs with some frequency in many jurisdictions

Question 12

Dusky standard

Answer 12

Relates to juvenile and adult competency to stand trial and decision-making abilities. The rule holds that defendants must be able to understand and appreciate the criminal proceedings against them and be able to assist their attorneys in their defense

Question 13

Forensic mental health assessments (FMHAs)

Answer 13

Conducted by psychologists and psychiatrists consulting with criminal courts. Competency to stand trial assessments and criminal responsibility evaluations are prominent examples

Question 14

Guilty but mentally ill (GBMI)

Answer 14

A verdict alternative in some states that allows defendants to be found guilty while seemingly affording them treatment for mental disorders

Question 15

Insanity

Answer 15

In the legal context, this term describes a judicial determination that an individual’s mental disorder relieves him or her of criminal responsibility for illegal actions

Question 16

Insanity Defense Reform Act (IDRA)

Answer 16

The federal law passed in 1984 that changed the standard for determining insanity in federal courts and made it more difficult for defendants to use this defense

Question 17

Interdisciplinary Fitness Interview - Revised

Answer 17

One of the available measures for assessing competency (fitness) to stand trial

Question 18

MacArthur Competency Assessment Tool - Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT - CA)

Answer 18

Used by clinicans to evaluate competence to stand trail

Question 19

Mental state at time of the offense screening evaluations

Answer 19

One of several tools used by clinicians to assess criminal responsibility, typically to determine whether an insanity defense could be supported

Question 20

Preponderance of the evidence

Answer 20

Proof that one side in a legal dispute has more evidence in its favor than the other. It is the standard required in most civil suits and may be relevant to criminal proceedings as well, but not to establish guilt

Question 21

Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scales

Answer 21

Measures designed to assess criminal responsibility and detect malingering in cases where the defendant is considering raising or has raised an insanity defense

Question 22

Sexually violent predator (SVP)

Answer 22

Term used for the sex offender who is believed to be a continuing danger to society. Under SVP statutes, such offenders can be civilly committed after the end of their prison sentences