Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

ABPP Writens > Juvies, Police Psych, Juries, Witnesses > Flashcards

Juvies, Police Psych, Juries, Witnesses Flashcards

1
Q

Two cases associated with juvenile justice rights reform

A

Kent v US (1966) - Juvenile courts require due process rights when kinds may be waived to the adult justice system

In re Gault (1967) - Juvenile justice system protections should more closely resemble those of the adult system (notice of charges, right to representation, privilege against self-incrimination, right to confront and cross examine)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

History of juvenile justice

A

1900-1960s - Enter school system, recognition of adolescence…welfare and rehabilitation were preferred over punishment (parens patriae via training schools and lengthy commitments)

1965-1990 - Kent and Gault cases, SCOTUS urges for reform and affording juveniles criminal protections

1990s - Violent crime increases and focus on punishment comes forward

2000s - Enter juvenile justice research, Miranda, competency, etc.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Consideration for assessing juvenile risk for reoffending

A

Use factors known to relate to juveniles

Recognize social context

Recognize difficulties in long-range estimates (most kids don’t continue to reoffend as adults)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Some risk of reoffending factors for juveniles

A

Earlier onset of aggression, school problems, personality traits (anger, impulsivity, lack of empathy), mental disorder, family conflict, aggressive peers, opportunity (access to guns)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Actuarial risk measures for juvies

A

SAVRY
YLSCMI

Sex offending: ERASOR, JSOAP-II

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Considerations for juvenile waiver to adult court

A

Juvenile presents with significant risk of harm to others

Unlikely to be rehabilitated in the juvenile system

Has characteristics suggesting mature criminal characteristics (sophistication and maturity)

ALSO - Consider history of previous treatment, responsiveness to intervention, estimated time required for rehabilitation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

How states assess juvenile CST

A

Use same adult, Dusky standard
Few states explicitly consider immaturity

Nexus between incompetence and a mental or developmental disability still exists, FAC, RAC, CWC…

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Measures for juvenile CST

A

JACI

FIT-R is undergoing validation

MacCAT-CA also undergoing validation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Juvenile capacity to waive Miranda

A

Still knowingly, voluntary, intelligent

Colorado v Connelly - voluntariness - be more mindful with youth due to susceptibility to adult influence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Things to assess for in nearly all juvenile assessments

Especially posttrial, sentencing, rehabilitation, etc.

A

Intellectual and social development

Personality/possible mental disorder

Consider development, family, dx, race and gender (for the purpose of norm groups), and knowing what rehabilitation exists in the community

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Measures to assess quality of juveniles families

A

Family environment scale

Family adaptability and cohesion evaluation series

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Youth behavioral health screeners

A

Global appraisal of individual needs

Massachusetts youth screening instrument

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Kent v United States

1966

A

Granted due process rights to children being waived to adult court
(Access to counsel, access to their record, given a hearing)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

In re Gault

1967

A

Juvenile defendants face a loss of liberty when they are denied the same due process rights as adults

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

In re Winship

1970

A

When finding a child guilty in a criminal charge, beyond a reasonable doubt standard is necessary (14th amendment due process)

Used to be preponderance…oops…

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Breed v Jones

1975

A

Juveniles cannot be subject to double jeopardy

Tried in the juvenile and adult system - pick one

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Thompson v Oklahoma

1988

A

Can’t execute juveniles under the age of 16

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Roper v Simmons

2005

A

Can’t execute ANY juveniles

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

GJI v State

1989

A

Adult competency protections don’t apply to juveniles

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Graham v Florida

2010

A

Juveniles charged with non-homicidal crimes can’t be sentenced to LWOP (8th amendment cruel and unusual punishment)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Miller v Alabama

2012

A

LWOP for juveniles committing murder is cruel and unusual punishment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Case law for juveniles concerning death penalty and LWOP

A

Thompson 1988 - No DP for kids under 16
Roper 2005 - No DP for juveniles period
Graham 2010 - No LWOP for non-homicidal juvenile crimes
Miller 2012 - No LWOP for juvenile crimes period

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Memory as trace evidence theory

A

A criminal event involving an eyewitness leaves a trace memory in the brain of the eyewitness

(Eh….)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Misinformation effect

A

When people receive misleading information about an event after the fact, they are more likely to integrate that information into future recollections of the event

25
Q

Factors leading to an increased likelihood of forming a false memory

A

Young children, low cog abilities, elderly

When a person of authority suggests memories

26
Q

Suggestive methods for obtaining memories for events

A

Asking people to imagine having such an experience
Suggestive dream interpretation
Hypnosis

27
Q

The problem with eyewitness identification

A

Often is considered direct evidence of guilt, but rates of mistaken identity remain very high

28
Q

Factors that lead to false identifications

A

Other race effect

Structural lineup bias (witness described as black, only black guy in the lineup)

Previous exposure to mugshots

29
Q

Ways to improve eye witness identification

A

Having people who look distinctly different (if someone is present who looks similar to the perpetrator, mistaken ID could happen)

Telling the witness the suspect may not be in the lineup

Going with the witnesses first, automatic, and rapid response

Doing a sequential lineup (was it this person (next) this person (etc))

30
Q

Voir dire

A

Process to question prospective jurors about relationships, opinions, or experiences that may bias them against the litigant

People in voir dire are called venirepersons

31
Q

General ways voir dire can take place

A

Judge can ask few basic questions in open court (not helpful for detecting bias)

Extensive questioning privately at the bench

Attorney surveys and questioning

32
Q

Two methods for removing jury members

A

Challenges for cause - unlimited number but the attorney has to demonstrate how a jurors bias will impact their ability to serve

Peremptory challenges - limited number, can get rid of a juror for any reason

33
Q

Challenges for cause

A

Removing a juror because there is a bias present that can impact their ability to be objective (unlimited number)

Must exclude jurors who don’t believe in death penalty from DP cases (“death qualification”)

You can do juror rehabilitation, but little research on the effectiveness of this

34
Q

Peremptory challenges

A

Limited in number, can do this for any reason

Opposing attorney can raise a red flag if they feel you removed a juror who is a member of a protected group (e.g., race), in this case, the attorney wanting the juror out needs to prove this wasn’t their reason

35
Q

Traditional v scientific jury selection

A

Traditional - goes off gut feeling, stereotypes, body language…
Not helpful or predictive, attorneys are not good at this

Scientific - utilize social science to guide jury selection, assess case-specific attitudes, view of legal system, culpability, demographic info

36
Q

Results on research related to jury selection

A

Higher income, more prestigious education - more likely to convict

Outgroup biases for race and gender

Upper income and male - more likely to be persuasive, selected as jury foreman

37
Q

Potential tasks that could be undertaken as a consultant

A

Case analysis and development

Report and file review

Identifying and retaining expert witnesses

Assisting in direct and cross examination

Preparing witnesses for trial

38
Q

Hypnosis cases

A

State v Hurd - hypnosis doesn’t meet Frye

People v Shirley - can’t testify after hypnosis restored your memory

Rock v Arkansas - no blanket bans on hypnosis

39
Q

Rock v Arkansas

1987

A

Placing blanket bans on hypnosis testimony is unconstitutional

Woman who shot her husband, hypnosis revealed she dropped weapon and it misfired…this was consistent with physical evidence

40
Q

Variables shown to affect rates of mistaken identification

A

Suspect-bias variables - things that may account for why a witness selects an innocent person or doesn’t say IDK

General impairment variables - things that account for poor eyewitness performance generally (different race, intoxication, etc.)

41
Q

Relevant judgement conceptualization

A

Eyewitnesses tendency to identify a person from a lineup who most closely resembles the eyewitnesses memory of the perpetrator RELATIVE TO the other members in the lineup

If the perpetrator is in the lineup, this works well…otherwise they’ll just choose the next closest person (no bueno)

42
Q

When is juror rehabilitation more likely to be effective

A

When their bias is from an external source (the media) rather than internal (race bias, etc.)

43
Q

Surveys used to predict jurors leanings

A

Juror bias scale

Pretrial juror attitudes questionnaire

Insanity defense attitudes revised

Attitudes towards the death penalty scale

44
Q

Ake v Oklahoma (1985)

As it pertains to trial consulting

A

Deemed trial consultants to be active, affiliated members of the defense team

Also suggested you can serve as an expert and consultant in the same case, which many forensic psychologists respectfully disagree with

45
Q

Things to consider when performing an eval for high-risk occupations

A

Understanding and experience working with people in that high-risk occupation

Familiarity with the essential functions of the position, and knowledge of the scientific literature on testing and screening for this type of job

Understanding of the limits of confidentiality and privilege, familiarity with state and federal issues that affect these types of evals

46
Q

Employment evals and FOIA

A

Some jurisdictions say your evaluation file is fair game under FOIA

Some jurisdictions found public interest to overrule that

Fitness for duty applicants may have more access than preemployment evaluees given the nature of their interest in the outcome

47
Q

Qualifications for preemployment

A

Generally murky, some exclude based on issues that prevent them from exercising the powers and duties inherent within the position

Other include a need for mental and emotional stability

48
Q

Per the ADA, when can an employer make medical inquiries and order an examination

A

If they are first given an offer of employment conditioned on the results of an eval

Subject all potential employees to the same eval

If the information obtained in the eval is kept confidential through restricted disclosure and access

49
Q

Importance of personality testing in employment evals

A

May want to use two, one to detect abnormal behavior, and one to assess for normal behavior

Compare validity between the measures

Known as “the basic model”

50
Q

Personality measures for employment evals

A 
NEO
16-PF
MMPI*
PAI*
CPI*
IPI*
51
Q

Fitness for duty evals

A

For employees whose communication, behavior, performance…raises concerns about whether they can continue

(Different from preemployment in that way)
- Boss/company puts the employees mental health at issue

52
Q

Business necessity standard for fitness for duty evaluations

A

Requires objective evidence that job-related problems or safety threats AND the presence of a known or suspected mental condition

53
Q

Factors to consider with FFDEs or threat assessment

A

Duration of risk

Nature and severity of the potential harm

Likelihood that potential harm will occur

Imminence of the potential harm

54
Q

Questions threat assessments should answer in the report

A

Does the employee have a mental or emotional disorder
What is the disorders impact on the job

Are there any significant impairments in their ability to perform essential job functions (and their cause)
What would it take to remedy these

55
Q

Job task analysis

A

Stipulate the essential and less essential functions of the job

Need this for a preemployment eval especially, and also perhaps for a fitness for duty

56
Q

Suitability analysis

A

Degree of fit between the persons capabilities and the requirements of the position

57
Q

Threshold analysis

A

For FFDEs, did the employer meet the legal threshold for mandating a fitness evaluation

Business necessity standard may be met when the employer knows of the issues, has observed performance problems, and can attribute the problems to the condition

If the employee is in particularly dangerous works, performance decline needn’t required

58
Q

Three types of opinions in FFDE evals

A

Fit for duty - no issues rendering the evaluee unable to carry out essential functions of the job, if problem is related to something other than a mental condition you can recommend other options (therapy, education, training, etc.)

Unfit for duty - if a good prognosis, you can make recommendations for remediation to fitness

Invalid evaluation - evaluee failed to cooperate with the evaluation, untruthful, or manipulated the findings and precluded a determination of fitness

ABPP Writens (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions