Term Paper on "Criminal Procedure and the U.S. Supreme Court"

Term Paper 5 pages (1523 words) Sources: 5

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Criminal Procedure and the U.S. Supreme Court

Although the specific laws that are involved vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, this paper assumes that there is a state law that permits police to hold mentally ill suspects for a lengthy period of time while determining their fitness for trial. Although this law is consistent with the laws of some other states, similar laws have been overturned in the United Kingdom and Europe. This paper provides a review of the relevant literature to develop two opinions concerning the constitutionality of this law from the perspectives of Justices Brennan and Scalia, followed by an assessment concerning how two other justices would likely have responded to these opinions. A summary of the research and important findings are presented in the conclusion.

Review and Discussion

Defendants who are deemed mentally ill and unfit for trial require careful disposition by criminal justice authorities. Beyond any specific jurisdictional requirements for determining mental fitness for trial, there is a pragmatic perspective involved wherein it just makes good business sense to divert these individuals from the normal criminal justice system to more appropriate settings in which mental healthcare services can be provided. The need for a thoughtful and informed approach to processing defendants who are claimed by any stakeholder as being incompetent for trial is therefore clear, but the human animal is a crafty creature, capable of guise, deception, misdirection and prevarication, particularly when the stakes are high. Consequently, distinguishing the legitimately mental ill from those who are feigning represents a vital element in the initial adjudication of these cases, but the amount of time that should be allowed to make this determination remains unclear. The need for an informed and evidence-based approach to diagnosing mental illness as part of the criminal justice process is also well documented because the adverse economic and social consequences of incarcerating these individuals transcends their effects on the mentally ill alone, but rather extend to the entire larger population in which prisons are funded and administered (Larrabee, 2005). For instance, Quinn (2009) reports that, "The poor treatment of California's mentally ill prisoners burdens the judicial system, drains the state's budget, and causes needless inmate suffering" (p. 261).

Healthcare practitioners have several established assessment tools available to them to establish competence for trial, and such assessments are routinely performed in many healthcare facilities in a cost effective and efficient fashion to distinguish legitimate mental health problems from malingering (Larrabee, 2005). In this regard, Kertzman, Grinspan, Birger and Shliapnikov (2006) report that, "Malingering is not considered a mental disorder, but rather a state that may become the focus of clinical attention, especially in forensic settings. People trying to avoid responsibility or punishment for criminal behavior often feign psychosis or severe cognitive impairment" (p. 113). The need for a certain amount of time to make a careful and thorough evaluation for fitness for trial, though, will inevitably vary from individual to individual. Other factors can introduce delays in the evaluation process as well, including a lack of resources and bureaucratic delays. Despite these constraints, it is clear that mental health evaluations for competency purposes are necessary given the high prevalence rate of malingering identified among criminal defendants to date. For instance, Kertzman and his associates emphasize that, "In criminal defendants referred for pretrial evaluation, malingering of cognitive impairments and psychosis was found in 12.1% of cases" (p. 113). While there are several assessment instruments available with known reliability and validity, a thorough evaluation may require a multidisciplinary effort that will likely require lengthy periods of time to complete. According to Kertzman et al., "Mental health professionals must employ the same degree of thoroughness in the assessment of malingering as they would in the establishment of any other diagnosis. To do this, psychiatrists base their expert conclusions on clinical interviews and on collateral sources such as psychological tests" (p. 113).

From the perspective of Justice Brennan, the fairness of a trial may be threatened in pro-se cases as a result of defendants' mental state, an issue recently addressed in Indiana v Edwards USSC No 7-208 (19 June 2008). In this case, the "defendant's uncertain mental state [and] a defendant's lack of capacity threatens an improper conviction or sentence [and] undercuts the most basic of the Constitution's criminal law objectives, providing a fair trial" (Mathias, 2008, para. 2). According to Mathias, in 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in the case, Indiana v. Edwards, which concerned the issue of competency in a pro-se trial. Based on Justice Brennan's holding in this case, it is reasonable to suggest that he would focus on the due process and right to a speedy trial aspects of unreasonable amounts of time being required to complete a competency assessment. As Justice Brennan put it, "[t]he Constitution would protect none of us if it prevented the courts from acting to preserve the very processes that the Constitution itself prescribes" (2008, para. 2).

In sum, Justice Brennan would likely emphasize the need for the assessment needed to establish fitness for trial, but he would restrict the amount of time in which the state had to complete the evaluation without risking a violation of a defendant's constitutional rights based on due process requirements for a speedy trial. Furthermore, Justice Brennan would make a case for establishing fitness for trial before proceeding in a criminal court in the first place in order to protect other constitutional rights as well. In this regard, Justice Brennan would likely stress that, "Any court proceeding must both be fair and 'appear fair.' Thus, the protections in the Sixth Amendment are designed to ensure not only a fair trial, but also the appearance of a fair trial. Further, ensuring that a defendant is competent to stand trial serves the purpose of having a fair trial" (Willis, 2010, p. 321). Likewise, because these are fundamental constitutional rights, Justice Scalia would likely weigh in on these issues largely in line with Justice Brennan, but he might adopt an alternative legal reasoning to support his rationale such as he did in Indiana v. Edwards. For instance, Justice Scalia emphasized in this case that, "a defendant who lacks the mental capacity . . . may undercut the most basic of the Constitution's criminal law objectives, providing a fair trial" (p. 2).

Therefore, the Sixth Amendment protections afforded criminal defendants require the establishment of competency for trial. According to Willis, "The Sixth Amendment affords protections to criminal defendants on trial. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court in Edwards failed to give guidance to lower courts on the appropriate standard to determine such competency of a defendant" (p. 322). As a result, the Supreme Court has articulated the need for establishing competency for trial as a fundamental constitutional right, but the lack of specific guidelines for establishing fitness for trial suggests that there are no "one-size-fits-all" approaches that are best suited for competency assessments, but rather each case much be evaluated on an individual basis -- a process that will vary according to various mental health and resource availability issues.

Finally, and despite the availability of various regulatory guidelines, the final determination of what is reasonable with respect to balancing the need for a speedy trial with the need to establish the competency of defendants to stand trial must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Because Justice Brennan's legal reasoning is based on sound constitutional principles, it is likely that other Supreme Court justices such as Justices Breyer and Ginsberg would also concur as their position with respect to the competency to stand trial considerations explicated in Indiana v. Edwards made clear.

Conclusion

The research showed that in the United States, the Constitution provides a number of protections that require proof of mental competency to stand trial as part of due process provisions, and that such evaluations must be accomplished in… READ MORE

How to Reference "Criminal Procedure and the U.S. Supreme Court" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Exclusionary Rule by the Supreme Court Case Study

Exclusionary Rule by the U.S. Supreme Court

Exclusionary Rule by the Supreme Court:

As a nation governed by the law, the United States uses her constitution and its amendments as… read more

Case Study 5 pages (1735 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

Effects of Supreme Court Decisions Essay

Supreme Court Decisions

The Nature and Purpose of Counseling

Effects of Supreme Court Decisions

Effects of Supreme Court Decisions

The major tenets of criminal procedure are widely known and accepted… read more

Essay 7 pages (2427 words) Sources: 6 Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

Criminal Investigation Scenario: Criminal Scene Investigators Term Paper

Criminal Investigation Scenario:

Criminal scene investigators are usually mandated with the task of actively processing a crime scene in order to collect evidence that would be used in arresting and… read more

Term Paper 6 pages (2010 words) Sources: 6 Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

Criminal Justice Sex Offender Regulations Maryland Research Paper

Criminal Justice

Sex Offender Regulations

Maryland's Sex Offender Registration Guidelines

People found guilty by a court of a sexual crime must register with the state. The amount of time and… read more

Research Paper 7 pages (2348 words) Sources: 2 Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

U.S. Government Interfere With Existing Federal Law Term Paper

U.S. government interfere with existing federal law that gives the decision to abort a child or not to abort the woman's along to make, in her own private way? The… read more

Term Paper 5 pages (1806 words) Sources: 2 Style: APA Topic: Abortion / Pro-Life / Pro-Choice

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>