Legal Decisions of Preadolescent and Adolescent Defendants: Predictors of Confessions,Pleas, Communication with Attorneys,and Appeals

While there is an increasing recognition that developmental differences may exist in legal decision-making, little research has examined this. This study examined the legal judgments of 152 defendants aged 11–17 (73 females, 79 males). Adolescents aged 15 and younger were more likely than older adolescents to confess and waive their right to counsel, and less likely to report that they would appeal their case or discuss disagreements with their attorneys. Also, while adolescents aged 15–17 were more likely to confess, plead guilty, and accept a plea bargain if they perceived that there was strong evidence against them, younger defendants’ legal decisions were not predicted by the strength of evidence. Importantly, defendants with poor legal abilities were more likely to waive legal protections, such as the right to counsel and to appeal. Defendants from below-average socioeconomic backgrounds were more likely to waive their interrogation rights, and defendants from ethnic minority groups were less likely to report that they would disclose information to their attorneys. The advice of attorneys, parents, and peers emerged as important predictors of plea decisions. None of the defendants reported that their parents advised them to assert the right to silence during police interrogation.     

Assessing competency to waiveMiranda rights in defendants with mental retardation

Criminal defendants with mental retardation face special problems in the process of interrogation and confession, particularly with regard to the knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver ofMiranda rights. Despite this, little attention has been paid to empirical measurement of this form of competency in mentally retarded adults. The present research uses scales originally developed by Grisso (1981) to measure competency to waive such rights in juveniles. Two samples of mentally retarded adults, one in a sheltered workshop setting and the other composed of current probationers, were tested. Both samples scored substantially lower on measures ofMiranda comprehension than Grisso's samples of juveniles and adults. There were also differences between the samples that appear attributable to differential levels of criminal justice experience. It is concluded that the Grisso scales may be helpful in determining competency to waiveMiranda rights in defendants with mental retardation. In addition, the present data raise strong concerns about the ability of many such defendants to make intelligentMiranda waivers. Policy recommendations are discussed.     

An Examination of the Relationship Between Competency to Stand Trial,Competency to Waive Interrogation Rights,and Psychopathology

This study compared the legal abilities of defendants (N = 212) with current primary psychotic disorders (n = 44), affective disorders (n = 42), substance abuse disorders (n = 54), and no diagnosed major mental illness (n = 72). Defendants with primary psychotic disorders demonstrated more impairment than did other defendants in their understanding of interrogation rights, the nature and object of the proceedings, the possible consequences of proceedings, and their ability to communicate with counsel. Psychosis was of limited value as a predictor however, and high rates of legal impairment were found even in defendants with no diagnosed major mental illness. Sources of within-group variance were examined to further explain this finding. Policy and clinical implications of these results are discussed.     

Competency Restoration: An Examination of the Differences Between Defendants Predicted Restorable and Not Restorable to Competency

According to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Jackson v. Indiana (1972), examiners must determine if a defendant has substantial probability of regaining competency through treatment in the foreseeable future. Previous research has indicated that, given the low base rate of defendants unable to be restored to competency, examiners are relatively poor at predicting which defendants will regain competency. Determining the characteristics of not restorable incompetent defendants and restorable incompetent defendants is a necessary first step toward improving examiners' ability to predict a defendant's likelihood of regaining competency. This study examined the competency evaluation reports of 468 defendants evaluated for competency to stand trial. Incompetent defendants significantly differed from competent defendants with regard to age, employment status, ethnicity, criminal charges, and psychiatric diagnosis. Few significant differences existed between defendants predicted restorable and those predicted not restorable by mental health examiners—the differences that did exist were related mainly to nonpsychiatric variables.     

Predictor Variables in Competency to Stand Trial Decisions

Clinicians possess significant discretion in competency to stand trial assessment. Therefore, it is paramount to explore the contribution of individual variables to ensure that the decision-making process is devoid of bias and solely relates to the legal criterion. To test for the possibility of bias in clinical decision-making, we examined the predictive efficiency of clinical, criminological, and sociodemographic variables in a sample of 468 criminal defendants referred for competency evaluations. Only clinical diagnostic variables and employment status were significant predictors. This finding supports the idea that examiner decisions of competency appear to be unbiased and relate primarily to a defendant's functional ability.     

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL STATUTES AND PROCEDURES

This study provides an analysis of the views of the legal community with respect to competency to stand trial statutes and procedures. Responses from North Carolina judges and defense attorneys reveal significant areas of disagreement or misunderstanding. While many judges believed that defense attorneys misunderstood or misused the competency procedures, the judges uniformly granted the motions. Defense attorneys indicated reasons for requesting competency evaluations that were frequently unrelated to concerns about competency. Hearings to determine competency were often not even held, and if a defendant was found to be incompetent. most judges believed that involuntary commitment to a mental institution should be automatic regardless of perceived dangerousness. The authors argue that these issues demand further attention and resolution to allow the competency laws to accomplish their intended goal without jeopardizing defendants’ rights.     

Perceptions of children during a police interrogation: Guilt,confessions, and interview fairness

Abstract

Jurors are often provided with confession evidence and must determine whether the confession was true, false, coerced, or voluntary. As more juveniles are tried in adult criminal court, jurors must increasingly make these determinations about minors’ statements. In this study, mock jurors read an actual interrogation of a child suspect that included confession evidence, and then provided judgments regarding the coerciveness of the interrogation, the child's and police's knowledge and behaviors, and guilt. Child age (11 versus 14 years) and gender were manipulated and examined in relation to participant gender and pre-existing sympathy levels for juvenile offenders. Factors external to the suspect – participant gender and sympathy for juvenile offenders – interacted with child suspect factors to influence perceptions of the child, the interrogation, and guilt. When multiple factors were considered, perceptions of suspect credibility and police fairness were the strongest predictors of guilt and perceived culpability. The findings have implications for decision-making in cases involving juvenile defendants and confession evidence.     

证据适格性与证据排除：三大诉讼间的比较与检视

非法证据排除规则与证据适格性之间的关系，是一种相辅相成的关系。从本质意义上讲，凡是在法律上被认为丧失或者欠缺证据适格性的证据．都应当在诉讼中受到排除而不得使用。诉讼的最终裁判结果所体现的公正性应当以程序正义为基础．而程序正义则包括诉讼过程的正当性．即为法律所允许的证据表现形式或者证据方法、取得有关证据资料或者信息来源的手段、方法以及法院在庭审中所采取的证据调查方式的合法性与有效性．这些均为程序正义所能够延及的空间与领域。反映在三大诉讼证据制度上．证据适格性与证据排除既有共性又有差异．并且差异往往要大于共性。     

Neuroscience and behavioral genetics in US criminal law: an empirical analysis

The goal of this study was to examine the growing use of neurological and behavioral genetic evidence by criminal defendants in US criminal law. Judicial opinions issued between 2005–12 that discussed the use of neuroscience or behavioral genetics by criminal defendants were identified, coded and analysed. Criminal defendants are increasingly introducing such evidence to challenge defendants’ competency, the effectiveness of defense counsel at trial, and to mitigate punishment.     

A Comparison of Defendants with Mental Illness Represented by Public Defenders and Private Attorneys: an Analysis of Court-Ordered Pretrial Psychiatric Evaluations

This study compared the characteristics and court-ordered evaluation questions and responses among 4,430 defendants to determine if differences existed between those represented by public defenders and private attorneys when receiving trial competency or responsibility psychiatric evaluations from a state department of mental health. Defendants represented by public defenders were more likely to be younger, to have less education, to have psychotic disorders, to have a history of inpatient psychiatric treatment, to live in urban or rural counties, and to be jailed at the time of the evaluation. In addition, defendants represented by public defenders were less likely to have a request for a criminal responsibility evaluation and more likely to be evaluated as having a mental illness, to be incompetent to stand trial, and to need hospitalization pending trial. Consideration of whether defendants with public defenders receiving less requests for responsibility evaluations was indicative of a therapeutic jurisprudence approach is discussed. Implications for research on types of legal representation of defendants with mental illness are discussed.     

论受审能力的恢复

受审能力评定越来越引起重视的情况下,对于无受审能力者,受审能力的恢复也是一项值得大家关注的问题,受审能力恢复的培训程序包括相关精神障碍治疗、法律知识培训、综合住院治疗;而个别程序的专门培训可能是受审能力最大程度恢复的必要措施。受审能力恢复评定的标准更多的参照于经典的Bennett标准。虽然有关受审能力恢复的研究还存在一些挑战,但为我国相关受审能力恢复的研究指明了道路,提供了很好的参考依据和措施。     

Psychotropic Medication and Competence to Stand Trial

At any given time, as many as 15,000 persons are hospitalized for study or treatment regarding their competence to stand trial. Although most of the defendants found incompetent to stand trial "could rapidly be returned to competence and so maintained were the facilities and treatments of modern psychiatry made available to them", the impact of recent advances in psychiatry—particularly drug therapy—has not been fully absorbed by the legal system. Defendants restored to competence by psychotropic drugs frequently require ongoing medication. Some courts, mistakenly assuming that psychotropic drugs produce a "chemical sanity" that is unacceptable for participation in a trial, have adopted a practice—the "automatic bar rule"—of automatically prohibiting the return for trial of defendants under the influence of such drugs. A lack of statutory, regulatory, or judicial guidance leaves the question largely to the discretion of individual trial judges. This article critically examines the automatic bar rule in light of the effects of various psychotropic drugs and of the consequences of the rule both to defendants and to the state.     

Restoration of competency to stand trial: Assessment with the Georgia Court Competency Test and the Competency Screening Test

Evaluations of the Georgia Court Competency Test—Mississippi Version Revised (GCCT-MSH) and the Competency Screening Test (CST) have supported their use with pretrial defendants in initial assessment of competency to stand trial. The present study evaluated the efficacy of these measures, as well as the Texas Competency Instrument, with an inpatient sample of defendants involved in a competency restoration program. Both measures were factor analyzed in an attempt to replicate previously identified factor structures. Neither factor structure was replicated; however, a distinct factor structure was identified for the GCCT-MSH. The relationships among sociodemographic variables, clinical variables, current symptomatology, and competency status (as measured by the GCCT-MSH) were evaluated using discriminant function analyses. The best predictors of GCCT-incompetency in this sample are a diagnosis of either a psychotic disorder or a nonpsychotic affective disorder as well as a low measured IQ. Current symptomatology, as measured by the SCL-90-R, was not an effective predictor of competency status.     

A comparison of bail amounts for hispanics, whites, and african americans: A single county analysis

Using 1996 data on defendants accused of felony offenses derived from a district court in a Midwestern jurisdiction, the authors employ bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine for significant differences between Hispanics and other racial and ethnic groups in the dependent variable, bail amount set by judge. To predict differences in the bail amount set by judges for Hispanic and other defendants, the multiple regression controls for two independent “legal” variables, prior arrest and seriousness of the instant offense, and for the “extra-legal” variables of age, gender, type of attorney, residency, and race. Our research shows that Hispanics receive higher bail amounts than White or African Americans; leading the authors to cast doubt on the tenets of “legal theory” which has gained attention as a model for explaining why members of racial or ethnic minorities receive harsher treatment at various stages of the criminal and juvenile justice system.     

The Effects of Legal and Extralegal Factors on Detention Decisions in US District Courts

The Bail Reform Act of 1984 changed the law dictating release and detention decisions in federal court. Since its passage, few studies have examined judicial decision-making in this context. Legal research enables us to account for the structure and interpretation of federal detention laws and to analyze previously neglected measures of legal factors in our analyses. We use US Sentencing Commission data on a sample of defendants who were sentenced in 2007 (N?=?31,043). We find that legal factors—particularly length of criminal history, having committed a violent or otherwise serious offense, and having committed the offense while under supervision of the criminal justice system—have the strongest relationships with the presentence detention outcome. A defendant’s age, race, and ethnicity have weaker relationships with detention. When we compare defendants who are similarly situated with respect to legal factors, the probability of detention is similar regardless of age, race, and ethnicity.     

Criminal Decision Making: The Development of Adolescent Judgment,Criminal Responsibility,and Culpability

Theories of judgment in decision making hypothesize that throughout adolescence, judgment is impaired because the development of several psychosocial factors that are presumed to influence decision making lags behind the development of the cognitive capacities that are required to make mature decisions. This study uses an innovative video technique to examine the role of several psychosocial factors—temporal perspective, peer influence, and risk perception—in adolescent criminal decision making. Results based on data collected from 56 adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18 years revealed that detained youth were more likely to think of future-oriented consequences of engaging in the depicted delinquent act and less likely to anticipate pressure from their friends than nondetained youth. Examination of the developmental functions of the psychosocial factors indicates age-based differences on standardized measures of temporal perspective and resistance to peer influence and on measures of the role of risk perception in criminal decision making. Assessments of criminal responsibility and culpability were predicted by age and ethnicity. Implications for punishment in the juvenile justice system are discussed.     

Are disturbed and normal adolescents equally competent to make decisions about mental health treatments?

This study uses a structured vignette procedure to assess competency to make treatment decisions in two groups of adolescents, one at risk for institutional placement and the other a matched community sample. Scores on Factual Understanding (the ability to recall facts), Inferential Understanding (the ability to make inferences about those facts), and Reasoning (the ability to weigh risks and benefits of various treatment options and to make choices based on that reasoning) were compared. Results showed that while at-risk adolescents and their community, counterparts did not differ in their factual and inferential understanding abilities, the at-risk adolescents did significantly less well than the community adolescents in reasoning. This difference could not be fully explained by differences in verbal IQ. Girls, no matter what their risk status, scored higher than boys on the Reasoning scale. Implications for legal policies concerning adolescents are discussed.     

两大法系非法证据排除规则比较研究

排除非法证据是保障被告人人权,维护司法公正的一项重要原则。由于法律文化传统的不同以及特定时期控制犯罪与保护人权的需要,不同法系之间以及同一法系不同国家之间有关这一问题的诉讼理论和具体对策往往存在着许多差异。对两大法系非法证据排除规则的发展历史及有关法律规定进行了比较和研究,目的在于为确立我国的非法证据排除规则提供借鉴。     

Traumatic Events and Maternal Education as Predictors of Verbal Ability for Preschool Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)

Despite research on the effects of intimate partner violence (IPV) on children, little is known about its impact on cognitive development. In this study, 87 preschool-aged children and their mothers exposed to IPV within the last two years participated in interviews to ascertain verbal ability, history of violence, and exposure to trauma. When compared to a national sample of 1,700 same-age children not evaluated for exposure to traumatic events, children exposed to IPV scored significantly lower on verbal ability, as assessed with standardized measures. In order to understand variation in verbal ability, multiple regression models were tested. Both prior exposure to traumatic events and the level of mother’s education were significant predictors of verbal ability. However, level of education mediated the relationship between traumatic events and the child’s verbal ability.