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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 2012-01, Vol.40 (2), p.261-265 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
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 & jurisprudence ; Empirical Research ; Humans ; Indiana ; Mental Competency - legislation & 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 & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Empirical Research</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Indiana</subject><subject>Mental Competency - legislation & 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 & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Empirical Research</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Indiana</topic><topic>Mental Competency - legislation & 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 |