Exam 3 Study Guide
Popular in Social Psychology of Justice
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Psychlogy
This 8 page Study Guide was uploaded by Emily Brandenburg on Friday March 27, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to 4362 at Ohio University taught by Hoyt in Winter2015. Since its upload, it has received 190 views. For similar materials see Social Psychology of Justice in Psychlogy at Ohio University.
Reviews for Exam 3 Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 03/27/15
Exam 3 Study Guide Chapter 8 Competency Competency whether the individual has the ability to make their own life decisions x Civil Competency o Involuntary psychiatric hospitalization due to danger to self or others I Danger to self suicidal thoughts or plans An individual could be hospitalized for up to 3 days without having to go to court I Danger to others show intent to harm another person threats I Probate court 0 Competency to manage finances live on own 0 Competency to make treatment decisions I MacArthur Competency Assessment Tool Treatment 0 Competency to make a will x Criminal Competency o Competent to stand trial I Dusky v United States 0 Sufficient present ability to consult with attorney 0 Rational understanding of proceedings I Burden is on defense to prove incompetence I Preponderance of evidence is standard 0 Most people are competent to stand trial 0 Competent to enter plea I Johnson v Zerbst o Competent to represent self I More stringent standard o If found not competent then it could be a violation of rights and appeals o Competent to be executed I Must understand that they are going to die and if they don t they can t be executed until competency is restored x Restoring Competency 0 Education of legal system I Court may see to it that defendant goes through the process of learning how the system works 0 Medication and other treatments I Legal right to refuse medication and courts ability to overrule 0 Can be difficult for a defense attorney to prove that their client is actually mentally ill if they are on medication I Russell Weston I Jared Laughner x Competency Tests 0 Competency Screening Tests CST I 22 item sentencecompletion 0 When I go to court the lawyer will 0 When they say a man is innocent until proven guilty I What concerns me most about my lawyer is o MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool Criminal Adjudication MacCATCA I Assesses 3 factors 0 Factual understanding of the legal system 0 Ability to reason about the legal system distinguish between more and less relevant information including ability to reason about two options pleading guilty or not guilty 0 Capacity to understand own legal situation and circumstances Chapter 9 The Insanity Defense x Insanity is a legal concept concerning criminal responsibility 0 State of mind at time of the crime 0 Awareness of the facts that make the act illegal x Insanity Defense Reform Act 1084 0 Before burden was on prosecutor to demonstrate sanity 0 Now burden is on defense to prove insanity x Modern Insanity Guidelines 0 Not guilty by Reason of Insanity NGRI I McNaughton Rule 0 Suffering from defect of reasondisease of mind 0 Didn t know nature amp quality of act 0 Didn t know act was wrong I Durham Rule 0 quotan accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect o Opened insanity defense to opinions of experts 0 Problem what is mental disease I Brawner Rule ALI standard 0 Psychological Element Not criminally responsible if behavior was a result of mental illness 0 Cognitive Element lack substantial capacity to appreciate wrongfulness of act 0 Volitional Element cannot conform to requirements of law 0 Specifically excluded psychopaths x Guilty but Mentally Ill GBMI o Criminally responsible but mental illness is recognized as mitigation factor 0 Treated in institution until recovered then imprisoned o Sentencing for GBMI I Can be held indefinitely I Time could exceed sentence x Who uses what guideline o 26 states use McNaughton OH TX and DC 21 states us ALI standard 20 states have GBMI 4 states have no NGRI Federal Government 0000 o In most states the burden is quotpreponderance of the evident not beyond a reasonable doubt x Public Perception and Reality of Insanity Please Callahan Steadman McGreevy and Robbins 1991 Silver Cirincione amp Steadman 1994 o Examined 1 million felony indictments in 8 states I 93 were insanity pleas 0 Public believes that 37 of felonies involve insanity pleas I Outcomes 26 found NGRI 64 found guilty 10 not guiltycharges dropped 0 Public believes that 44 result in NGRI x Insanity Plea Crimes 0 Of those pleading NGRI I 29 physical assaults I 26 property crimes I 22 robbery I 14 murder charges 0 Of those receiving NGRI I 38 physical assault I 18 property crimes I 15 murder cases I 7 robbery 0 Mental Health and Insanity I 43 of those pleading insanity were diagnosed as schizophrenic I 68 of those receiving NGRI were schizophrenic Chapter 6 Jury Selection x Events in a Trial 0 Pretrial actions hearings and motions 0 Discovery process of sharing information I Witness lists I Evidence I Trial strategy only thing such as alibi witnesses and insanity pleas o Depositions I Legal binding document 0 Constitutional Issues I Evidence admissibility due process rights confession voluntariness etc x Jury selection 0 Venire summons to appear as part ofjury panel only 14 are selected but many more are summoned I Source ofjurors and potential bias 0 Voter registration but bias is that not everyone is a registered voter o Bias because certain groups are less likely to vote younger people 0 DMV but not everyone has a driver s license 0 Property taxes or utility bill I Exemptions from jury duty 60 of people try to get out ofjury duty 0 Comes from the Judge 0 Know people involved in the case 0 About to give birth or have a medical disability 0 Demonstrate that missing work would put you in a financial bind o Voir dire questioning ofjurors for selection on jury I Challenges to strike potential juror from panel 0 Challenge for Cause about bias the prosecution or defense shows the person would be biased 0 Relations racism victim of the same crime 0 There is an unlimited number of challenges 0 Peremptory Challenge exempt someone for quotno reason but there is a limited number of challenges allowed 0 Defense usually gets a few more than the prosecution I Batson v Kentucky 1986 black man convicted by an allwhite Jury 0 Cannot exclude jurors because of race 0 Gender later included x Scientific Jury Selection 0 Friendly Juror Profile I Who would you want 0 Assessing juror bias I Punitiveness presumption of innocence etc o How do people see punishment or mental illness 0 What are their legal beliefs 0 Personality Trait Assessment I Authoritarianism I Rigid thinking prejudicial adherence to authority figures and rules 0 More likely to be swayed by authority figure testimony I Satisficers work to please others may make decision based on what others decide I Need for cognition 0 People who enjoy working through things and solving problems 0 Opening statements I Order options and importance 0 Prosecution is first because they have the burden of proof 0 Defense can give statement right after the prosecution or they can wait until after the prosecution brings up their witnesses 0 Best to go right after the prosecution 0 Very important because they influence how the jury will interpret the following information o Evidencewitness presentation I Order and questioning o Prosecution always goes first 0 Examination 0 Crossexamination 0 Defense makes the prosecution s witness look bad and unreliable o Redirect o Prosecution saves the reliability of their witness o Recross I Closing statements 0 Summarizing everything for the jury 0 Order 0 The prosecution has the right to go last recency effect I Want to be emotional and bring up the victims and put faith in the jury I The defense wants to put doubt in the jury s mind x Tactics in the Courtroom o Crossexamination of opposing counsel s witnesses I Aggressive questioning v ingratiation I Presumptuous questioning 0 Assuming something in the question I Ambiguous questions 0 A question that forces the witness to say quotI don t know or quotI can t say that for sure I Objectionable Questioning 0 Just say something to put it in the mind of the jurors 0 Can get contempt in court if the Judge know you know you re not allowed to say something I Pretense of evidence 0 Always have something in your hand I Evidentiary Tactics 0 Recreation of crime scenes 0 Photos acting 0 Graphic Images 0 Don t want to show too many and overwhelm the jury x Judicial Instructions to the Jury 0 Procedures I Presumption of innocence I Determination of facts admissibility of evidence credibility of witnesses I Limiting discussion of trial 0 Charges I Multiple charges limiting instructions I Options on charges 0 Verdictdeliberation I Reasonable doubt what is it I Decision rule 0 Majority verdict or all vote the same I Mistrials 0 Jury can t make a decision 0 Juror comprehension of instructions I Average education is a high school diploma
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'