This article reviews the various statutes, case law, and commentary regarding legal tests for competency and sets forth conclusions regarding an appropriate legal test for competence (CFE), drawing parallels to competence to stand trial where appropriate. Two imporatant Supreme Court Cases, Ford v. Wainwright (1986) and Panetti v. Quarterman (2007), are discussed in detail and relevant aspects of the Panetti case are used to underscore important facets regarding the evaluation of CFE. Implications of Ford and Panetti for the test of CFE and its evaluation are highlighted. Six practical guidelines following them from Panetti for the evaluation of CFE are disc used.
AckersonK. S.BrodskyS. L.ZapfP. A. (2005). Judges' and psychologists' assessments of legal and clinical factors in competence for execution. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 164–193.
2.
American Bar Association. (2006). Recommendation and report on the death penalty and persons with mental disabilities. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter, 30, 668–677.
AppelbaumP. S. (1986). Competence to be executed: Another conundrum for mental health professionals. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 37, 682–684.
6.
Barnard v. Collins, 13 F. 3d 871 (5th Cir, 1994).
7.
BlackstoneW. (1979). Commentaries on the laws of England, Volume 1: Of the rights of persons. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1765 by Clarendon Press.)
8.
BlackstoneW. (1979). Commentaries on the laws of England, Volume 2: Of the rights of things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Oxford. England: Clarendon Press. (Original work published in 1766 by Clarendon Press.)
9.
BlackstoneW. (1979). Commentaries on the laws of England, Volume 3: Of private wrongs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. (Original work published in 1768 by Clarendon Press.)
10.
BlackstoneW. (1979). Commentaries on the laws of England, Volume 4: Of public wrongs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. (Original work published in 1769 by Clarendon Press.)
11.
BonnieR. J. (1989). Dilemmas in administering the death penalty: Conscientious abstention, professional ethics, and the needs of the legal system. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 67–90.
12.
BonnieR. J. (1990). Grounds for professional abstention in capital cases: A reply to Brodsky. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 99–102.
13.
BonnieR. J. (1992). The competence of criminal defendants: A theoretical reformulation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 10, 291–316.
14.
BonnieR. J. (1993). The competence of criminal defendants: Beyond Dusky and Drope. University of Miami Law Review, 47, 539–601.
15.
BrodskyS. L. (1990). Professional ethics and professional morality in the assessment of competence for execution: A response to Bonnie. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 91–97.
16.
BrodskyS. L.ZapfP. A.BoccacciniM. (2001). The last competency: An examination of legal, ethical, and professional ambiguities regarding evaluations of competence for execution. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 1, 1–25.
17.
BrodskyS.L.ZapfP. A.BoccacciniM. T. (2005). Competency for execution assessments: Ethical continuities and professional tasks. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 5, 65–74.
18.
CunninghamM. D.VigenM. P. (1999). Without appointed counsel in capital postconviction proceedings: The self-representation competency of Mississippi death row inmates. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26, 293–321.
19.
CunninghamM. D.VigenM. P. (2002). Death row inmate characteristics, adjustment, and confinement: A critical review of the literature. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 191–210.
20.
DeitchmanM. A.KennedyW. A.BeckhamJ. C. (1991). Self-selection factors in the participation of mental health professionals in competency for execution evaluations. Law & Human Behavior, 15, 287–303.
21.
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).
22.
EbertB. (2001). Competency to be executed: A proposed instrument to evaluate an inmate's level of competency in light of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against the execution of the presently insane. Law and Psychology Review, 25, 29–57.
23.
EvansG. L. (1991). Perry v. Louisiana: Can a state treat an incompetent prisoner to ready him for execution?Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 19, 249–270.
24.
EwingC. P. (1987). Diagnosing and treating “insanity” on death row: Legal and ethical perspectives. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 175–185.
25.
Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986).
26.
Godinez v. Moran, 113 S. Ct. 2680 (1993).
27.
HamptonK. S.WierciochG. W. (2006). Panetti v. Quarterman: Brief for petitioner. Omaha, NE: Cockle Law Brief Printing Company.
28.
HardingR. M. (1994). “Endgame”: Competency and the execution of condemned inmates—A proposal to satisfy the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment. St. Louis University Law Review, 14, 105–151.
29.
HeilbrunK. S. (1987). The assessment of competency for execution: An overview. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 383–396.
30.
HeilbrunK. S.McClarenH. A. (1988). Assessment of competency for execution? A guide for mental health professionals. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 16, 205–216.
31.
HeilbrunK.RadeletM. L.DvoskinJ. (1992). The debate on treating individuals incompetent for execution. American Journal of Psychiatry, 149, 596–605.
32.
HenslK. B. (2005). Restoring competency for execution: The paradoxical debate continues with the case of Singleton v. Norris. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 5, 55–68.
33.
KermaniE. J.KantorJ. E. (1994). Psychiatry and the death penalty: The landmark Supreme Court cases and their ethical implications for the profession. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 22, 95–108.
34.
LeongG. B.SilvaJ. A.WeinstockR.GanziniL. (2000). Survey of forensic psychiatrists on evaluation and treatment of prisoners on death row. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law, 28, 427–432.
35.
LyonA. D.CunninghamM. D. (2006) Reason not the need: Does the lack of compelling state interest in maintaining a separate death row make it unlawful?American Journal of Criminal Law, 33, 1–30.
36.
MathiasR. E. (1988). Assessment of competency for execution: Assessment and dissonance on death row—the dilemma of consultation. Forensic Reports, 1, 125–132.
37.
MillerR. D. (1988). Evaluation of and treatment for competency to be executed: A national survey and an analysis. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 16, 67–90.
38.
MillerK. S.RadeletM. L. (1993). Executing the mentally ill: The criminal justice system and the case of Alvin Ford. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
MossmanD. (1987). Assessing and restoring competency to be executed: Should psychiatrists participate?Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 397–409.
40.
MossmanD. (1995). Denouement of an execution competency case: Is Perry pyrrhic?Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 23, 269–284.
Panetti v. Dretke, 401 F. Supp. 2d 702 (W.D. Tex. 2004).
43.
Panetti v. Dretke, 448 F. 3d 815 (CA5 2006).
44.
Panetti v. Quarterman, 549 U. S.___(2007), 127 S. Ct. 2842 (2007).
45.
PerlinM. L. (1996). “Dignity was the first to leave”: Godinez v. Moran, Colin Ferguson, and the trial of mentally disabled criminal defendants. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 14, 61–81.
46.
PirelliG.ZapfP. A. (2008). An investigation of psychologists' practices and attitudes toward participation in capital evaluations. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 8, 1–28.
47.
RadeletM. L.BarnardG. W. (1986). Ethics and the psychiatric determination of competency to be executed. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 14, 37–53.
48.
RadeletM. L.BarnardG. W. (1988). Treating those found incompetent for execution: Ethical chaos with only one solution. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 16, 297–308.
49.
RogersR.ShumanD. (2005). Fundamentals of forensic practice: Mental health and criminal law. New York: Springer.
50.
RothL. H.MeiselA.LidzC. W. (1977). Tests of competency to consent to treatment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 279–284.
ShapiroD. L.Ethical dilemmas in competency for execution evaluations. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 5, 75–82.
53.
SloboginC. (2007). The Supreme Court's recent criminal mental health cases: Rulings of questionable competence. Criminal Justice, 22, 8–15.
54.
SmallM. A.OttoR. K. (1991). Evaluations of competency to be executed: Legal contours and implications for assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 146–158.
55.
WhiteC. G. (1982). Ethical guidelines for psychologist participation in death penalty proceedings: A survey. Professional Psychology, 13, 327–329.
56.
ZapfP. A.BoccacciniM. T.BrodskyS. L. (2003). Assessment of Competency for Execution: Professional Guidelines and an Evaluation Checklist. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 103–120.
57.
ZapfP. A.RoeschR. (2008). Best practices for forensic mental health assessments: Evaluation of competence to stand trial. New York, NY: Oxford.
58.
ZapfP. A.SkeemJ. L.GoldingS. L. (2005). Factor structure and validity of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool—Criminal Adjudication. Psychological Assessment, 17, 433–445.
