Forty Years After Jackson v. Indiana: States' Compliance With “Reasonable Period of Time” Ruling

In Jackson v. Indiana (1972) the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may not indefinitely confine criminal defendants solely on the basis of incompetence to stand trial. The Court ruled that the commitment duration be limited based on the likelihood of restorability, but did not provide specific tim...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2012-01, Vol.40 (2), p.261-265
Hauptverfasser: Kaufman, Andrew R, Way, Bruce B, Suardi, Enrico
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 265
container_issue 2
container_start_page 261
container_title The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
container_volume 40
creator Kaufman, Andrew R
Way, Bruce B
Suardi, Enrico
description In Jackson v. Indiana (1972) the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may not indefinitely confine criminal defendants solely on the basis of incompetence to stand trial. The Court ruled that the commitment duration be limited based on the likelihood of restorability, but did not provide specific time limits. Nearly four decades later, there is striking heterogeneity regarding the length of confinement. As of 2007, 28 percent of the states specify 1 year or less, 20 percent specify 1 to 10 years, 22 percent link the limit to the criminal penalty for the charged offense (up to life), and 30 percent set no limit. Thus, most state statutes seem out of compliance with Jackson. While research has focused on predicting restorability and testing restoration modalities, empirical evidence about the reasonable length of time to determine restorability has not been adequately addressed. Quantitative analysis of Jackson's reasonable period of time is needed to ensure due process for incompetent felony defendants.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017616737</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1017616737</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-h241t-b20b00d7d051c04a5000e3b262555bc1e95b479a025207dcf4253c1fb9f7db303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo10NFKwzAUBuAiitPpK0huRG8qJ0mTUO_GcDoZKHMiXoWkTddo2s6mtexuD6IvtyexsAkHzs_h4784B8EJjiMaUs7JYZ8hpiEXMR0Ep95_AFDRz3EwIIRTRgFOgnRS1c0avRtVezTKGlOjR5V8-qpE3zdoWqZWleoWvTSqMf4Kjati5fpTYtCbbXK03fzMjeq10s6gZ1PbKkVVhha2MNvNL5q3zpbLs-AoU86b8_0eBq-Tu8X4IZw93U_Ho1mYkwg3oSagAVKRAsMJRIoBgKGacMIY0wk2MdORiBUQRkCkSRYRRhOc6TgTqaZAh8H1rndVV1-t8Y0srE-Mc6o0VeslBiw45oKKnl7saasLk8pVbQtVr-X_Z3pwuQO5XeadrY30hXKu50R2XReBJJJwTP8A4KNtiQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1017616737</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Forty Years After Jackson v. Indiana: States' Compliance With “Reasonable Period of Time” Ruling</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kaufman, Andrew R ; Way, Bruce B ; Suardi, Enrico</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaufman, Andrew R ; Way, Bruce B ; Suardi, Enrico</creatorcontrib><description>In Jackson v. Indiana (1972) the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may not indefinitely confine criminal defendants solely on the basis of incompetence to stand trial. The Court ruled that the commitment duration be limited based on the likelihood of restorability, but did not provide specific time limits. Nearly four decades later, there is striking heterogeneity regarding the length of confinement. As of 2007, 28 percent of the states specify 1 year or less, 20 percent specify 1 to 10 years, 22 percent link the limit to the criminal penalty for the charged offense (up to life), and 30 percent set no limit. Thus, most state statutes seem out of compliance with Jackson. While research has focused on predicting restorability and testing restoration modalities, empirical evidence about the reasonable length of time to determine restorability has not been adequately addressed. Quantitative analysis of Jackson's reasonable period of time is needed to ensure due process for incompetent felony defendants.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1093-6793</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-3662</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22635300</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law</publisher><subject>Commitment of Mentally Ill - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Empirical Research ; Humans ; Indiana ; Mental Competency - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Supreme Court Decisions ; Time Factors ; United States</subject><ispartof>The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2012-01, Vol.40 (2), p.261-265</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22635300$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaufman, Andrew R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Way, Bruce B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suardi, Enrico</creatorcontrib><title>Forty Years After Jackson v. Indiana: States' Compliance With “Reasonable Period of Time” Ruling</title><title>The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law</title><addtitle>J Am Acad Psychiatry Law</addtitle><description>In Jackson v. Indiana (1972) the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may not indefinitely confine criminal defendants solely on the basis of incompetence to stand trial. The Court ruled that the commitment duration be limited based on the likelihood of restorability, but did not provide specific time limits. Nearly four decades later, there is striking heterogeneity regarding the length of confinement. As of 2007, 28 percent of the states specify 1 year or less, 20 percent specify 1 to 10 years, 22 percent link the limit to the criminal penalty for the charged offense (up to life), and 30 percent set no limit. Thus, most state statutes seem out of compliance with Jackson. While research has focused on predicting restorability and testing restoration modalities, empirical evidence about the reasonable length of time to determine restorability has not been adequately addressed. Quantitative analysis of Jackson's reasonable period of time is needed to ensure due process for incompetent felony defendants.</description><subject>Commitment of Mentally Ill - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Empirical Research</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Indiana</subject><subject>Mental Competency - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Supreme Court Decisions</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>1093-6793</issn><issn>1943-3662</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo10NFKwzAUBuAiitPpK0huRG8qJ0mTUO_GcDoZKHMiXoWkTddo2s6mtexuD6IvtyexsAkHzs_h4784B8EJjiMaUs7JYZ8hpiEXMR0Ep95_AFDRz3EwIIRTRgFOgnRS1c0avRtVezTKGlOjR5V8-qpE3zdoWqZWleoWvTSqMf4Kjati5fpTYtCbbXK03fzMjeq10s6gZ1PbKkVVhha2MNvNL5q3zpbLs-AoU86b8_0eBq-Tu8X4IZw93U_Ho1mYkwg3oSagAVKRAsMJRIoBgKGacMIY0wk2MdORiBUQRkCkSRYRRhOc6TgTqaZAh8H1rndVV1-t8Y0srE-Mc6o0VeslBiw45oKKnl7saasLk8pVbQtVr-X_Z3pwuQO5XeadrY30hXKu50R2XReBJJJwTP8A4KNtiQ</recordid><startdate>20120101</startdate><enddate>20120101</enddate><creator>Kaufman, Andrew R</creator><creator>Way, Bruce B</creator><creator>Suardi, Enrico</creator><general>American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120101</creationdate><title>Forty Years After Jackson v. Indiana: States' Compliance With “Reasonable Period of Time” Ruling</title><author>Kaufman, Andrew R ; Way, Bruce B ; Suardi, Enrico</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-h241t-b20b00d7d051c04a5000e3b262555bc1e95b479a025207dcf4253c1fb9f7db303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Commitment of Mentally Ill - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Empirical Research</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Indiana</topic><topic>Mental Competency - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Supreme Court Decisions</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaufman, Andrew R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Way, Bruce B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suardi, Enrico</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaufman, Andrew R</au><au>Way, Bruce B</au><au>Suardi, Enrico</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Forty Years After Jackson v. Indiana: States' Compliance With “Reasonable Period of Time” Ruling</atitle><jtitle>The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law</jtitle><addtitle>J Am Acad Psychiatry Law</addtitle><date>2012-01-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>261</spage><epage>265</epage><pages>261-265</pages><issn>1093-6793</issn><eissn>1943-3662</eissn><abstract>In Jackson v. Indiana (1972) the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may not indefinitely confine criminal defendants solely on the basis of incompetence to stand trial. The Court ruled that the commitment duration be limited based on the likelihood of restorability, but did not provide specific time limits. Nearly four decades later, there is striking heterogeneity regarding the length of confinement. As of 2007, 28 percent of the states specify 1 year or less, 20 percent specify 1 to 10 years, 22 percent link the limit to the criminal penalty for the charged offense (up to life), and 30 percent set no limit. Thus, most state statutes seem out of compliance with Jackson. While research has focused on predicting restorability and testing restoration modalities, empirical evidence about the reasonable length of time to determine restorability has not been adequately addressed. Quantitative analysis of Jackson's reasonable period of time is needed to ensure due process for incompetent felony defendants.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law</pub><pmid>22635300</pmid><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1093-6793
ispartof The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2012-01, Vol.40 (2), p.261-265
issn 1093-6793
1943-3662
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017616737
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Commitment of Mentally Ill - legislation & jurisprudence
Empirical Research
Humans
Indiana
Mental Competency - legislation & jurisprudence
Supreme Court Decisions
Time Factors
United States
title Forty Years After Jackson v. Indiana: States' Compliance With “Reasonable Period of Time” Ruling
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T03%3A23%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Forty%20Years%20After%20Jackson%20v.%20Indiana:%20States'%20Compliance%20With%20%E2%80%9CReasonable%20Period%20of%20Time%E2%80%9D%20Ruling&rft.jtitle=The%20journal%20of%20the%20American%20Academy%20of%20Psychiatry%20and%20the%20Law&rft.au=Kaufman,%20Andrew%20R&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=261&rft.epage=265&rft.pages=261-265&rft.issn=1093-6793&rft.eissn=1943-3662&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1017616737%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1017616737&rft_id=info:pmid/22635300&rfr_iscdi=true