Adjudicative competence evaluations are commonly requested for adult criminal defendants, and are becoming increasingly common among juvenile defendants as well. However, we do not have an understanding of what information judges seek in these evaluations. In this study, juvenile and criminal court judges from seven states (N = 166) were surveyed. Results indicated that judges: (1) consider clinicians' ultimate opinion to be an essential component of reports, and more important than descriptive information and rationales for opinions; (2) view forensic and psychological testing as valuable; (3) look for similar but not identical characteristics in juvenile and adult competence evaluations; and (4) consider opinions about maturity to be an important component of competence evaluations in juvenile court.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
725 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann 5/104-15 (West 2007).
2.
Ark. Code. Ann. § 9-27-502 (West 2007).
3.
Ark. Code. Ann. § 5-2-302, 305 (West 2006).
4.
Ariz. Revis. Stat. Ann. § 8-291.01 (West 2007).
5.
Ariz. Revis. Stat. Ann. § 13-4509 (West 2007).
6.
BarnumR.2000. “Clinical and forensic evaluation of competence to stand trial in juvenile defendants”. In Youth on trial, Edited by: GrissoT.SchwartzR. G.73–103. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7.
BartolC. R.BartolA. M.2004. Psychology and Law: Research, theory, and application, Thousand Oaks, CA: Thomsen.
8.
BaruchY.1999. Response rate in academic studies - A comparative analysis. Human Relations, 52: 421–438.
9.
BonnieR. J.GrissoT.2000. “Adjudicative competence and youthful offenders”. In Youth on trial: A developmental perspective on juvenile justice, Edited by: GrissoT.SchwartzR. G.73–103. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 16-8-102(3), 106 (West 2007).
11.
Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. 1991. Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15: 655–665.
12.
Committee on the Revision to the Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists (2006). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologistswww.ap-ls.org (Accessed: 5 June 2007).
13.
BorumR.GrissoT.1995. Psychological test use in criminal forensic evaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26: 465–473.
14.
BorumR.GrissoT.1996. Establishing standards for criminal forensic reports: An empirical analysis. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 24: 297–317.
15.
ChristyA.DouglasK.OttoR.PetrilaJ.2004. Juveniles evaluated incompetent to proceed: Characteristics and quality of mental health professionals’ evaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35: 380–388.
16.
Díaz de radaV.2005. The effect of follow-up mailings on the response rate and response quality in mail surveys. Quality and Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 39: 1–18.
17.
Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (1975).
18.
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).
19.
GrissoT.1987. The economic and scientific future of forensic psychological assessment. American Psychologist, 42: 831–839.
20.
GrissoT.1998. Forensic evaluations of juveniles, Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Exchange.
21.
GrissoT.2003. Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and instruments, 2nd, New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.
22.
GrissoT.2005a. Evaluating juveniles’ adjudicative competence: A guide for clinical practice, Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
23.
GrissoT.2005b. Evaluating juveniles’ adjudicative competence: A guide for legal professionals, Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
24.
GrissoT.QuinlanJ.2005. Juvenile court clinical services: A national description, Worcester, MA: Law and Psychiatry Program, University of Massachusetts Medical School.
25.
GrissoT.SteinbergL.WoolardJ.CauffmanE.ScottE.GrahamS.LexcenF.ReppucciN. D.SchwartzR.2003. Juveniles’ competence to stand trial: A comparison of adolescents’ and adults’ capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 27: 333–363.
26.
HaneyC.1980. Psychology and legal change: On the limits of a factual jurisprudence. Law and Human Behavior, 6: 191–235.
27.
HeilbrunK.1992. The role of psychological testing in forensic assessment. Law and Human Behavior, 16: 257–272.
28.
HeilbrunK.CollinsS.1995. Evaluations of trial competency and mental state at the time of the offense: Report characteristics. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26: 61–67.
29.
HessJ.ThomasH.1963. Incompetence to stand trial: Procedures, results, and problems. American Journal of Psychiatry, 119: 713–720.
30.
In re Hyrum H., 131 P.3d 1058 (Ariz. Ct. A pp. 2006).
31.
KingK. J.MillerJ. A.2005. BNA's directory of state and federal courts, judges, and clerks, Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs.
32.
KruhI.SullivanL.EllisM.LexcenF.McClellanJ.2006. Juvenile competence to stand trial: A historical and empirical analysis of a juvenile forensic evaluation service. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 5: 109–123.
33.
McGarryA. L.1965. Competency for trial and due process via the state hospital. American Journal of Psychiatry, 122: 623–631.
34.
MeltonG. B.PetrilaJ.PoythressN. G.SloboginC.1997. Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers, 2nd, New York: Guilford Press.
35.
NicholsonR. A.NorwoodS.2000. The quality of forensic psychological assessments, reports, and testimony: Acknowledging the gap between promise and practice. Law and Human Behavior, 24: 9–44.
36.
OberlanderL. B.GoldsteinN.HoC. N.2001. Preadolescent adjudicative competence: Methodological considerations and recommendations for practice standards. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19: 545–563.
37.
OgloffJ. R. P.FinkelmanD.1999. “Psychology and law: An overview”. In Psychology and law: The state of the discipline, Edited by: RoeschR.HartS. D.OgloffJ. R. P.2–20. New York: Kluwer Academic.
38.
OttoR. K.HeilbrunK.2002. The practice of forensic psychology: A look toward the future in light of the past. American Psychologist, 57: 5–18.
39.
People v. Bennett, 511 N.E.2d 1340 (Ill. App. Ct. 1987).
40.
ReddingR.FrostL.2001. Adjudicative competence in the modern juvenile court. Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 9: 353–410.
41.
RoeschR.GoldingS. L.1980. Competency to stand trial, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
42.
RobbinsE.WatersJ.HerbertP.1997. Competency to stand trial evaluations: A study of actual practice in two states. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 25: 469–483.
43.
RybaN. L.CooperV. G.ZapfP. A.2003a. Juvenile competence to stand trial evaluations: A Survey of current practices and test usage among psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34: 499–507.
44.
RybaN. L.CooperV. G.ZapfP. A.2003b. Assessment of maturity in juvenile competency to stand trial evaluations: A survey of practitioners. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 3: 23–45.
45.
SalekinR. T.RogersR.UstadK. L.2001. Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, and amenability to treatment. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7: 381–408.
46.
SalekinR. T.YffR. M. A.NeumannC. S.LeiscticoA. R.ZalotA. A.2002. Juvenile transfer to adult courts: A look at the prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity and amenability to treatment through a legal lens. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8: 373–410.
47.
SkeemJ. L.GoldingS. L.1998. Community examiners’ evaluations of competence to stand trial: Common problems and suggestions for improvement. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29: 357–367.
48.
SkeemJ. L.GoldingS. L.CohnN. B.BergeG.1998. The logic and reliability of evaluations of competence to stand trial. Law and Human Behavior, 22: 519–547.
49.
Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 46B.025 (Vernon 2007).
50.
Tex. Fam. Code. Ann. § 55.31–32 (Vernon 2007).
51.
TillbrookC.MumleyD.GrissoT.2003. Avoiding expert opinions on the ultimate legal question: The case for integrity. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 3: 77–87.
52.
TomkinsA. J.OurslandK.1991. Social and social scientific perspectives in judicial interpretations of the Constitution: A historical view and an overview. Law and Human Behavior, 15: 101–120.
53.
ViljoenJ. L.WingroveT.2007. Legal standards for adolescents’ adjudicative competence: Judges’ and lawyers’ views. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13: 204–229.
54.
ZapfP. A.HubbardK. L.CooperV. G.WheelesM. C.RonanK. A.2004. Have the courts abdicated their responsibility for determinations of competency to stand trial to clinicians?. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 4: 27–44.
55.
ZapfP. A.ViljoenJ. L.2003. Issues and considerations regarding the use of assessment instruments in the evaluation of competency to stand trial. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21: 351–367.
