Ten Year Research Update (2001–2010): Evaluations for Competence to Stand Trial (Adjudicative Competence)

Abstract

This article reviews and evaluates publications during 2001-2010 with relevance for assessments of competence to stand trial, referred to in this article as adjudicative competence. The review focuses specifically on articles that provide new concepts or data supported by research or case analyses. The studies are reviewed under the following headings: (i) systemic issues, (ii) conceptual guidelines for AC evaluations, (iii) AC assessment methods, (iv) empirical correlates of AC judgments and psycholegal abilities, (v) quality of AC evaluations and reports, (vi) interpretive issues, (vii) special populations (defendants who are elderly, defendants with intellectual disabilities), (viii) AC evaluations of juveniles, and (ix) treatment of incompetent defendants. Suggestions are offered for further research to advance the quality of clinical evaluations of adjudicative competence.

Influence of Criminal Justice Involvement and Psychiatric Diagnoses on Treatment Costs Among Adults With Serious Mental Illness

“…Individuals with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders are at higher risk than those with mood disorders of incompetency findings (6), less likely to be restored to competency once found incompetent (7), and undergo longer related forensic hospitalizations (7, 8), which is highly consistent with the forensic hospitalization experience among the adults in our study.…”

Competency to stand trial evaluations: A state‐wide review of court‐ordered reports

“…A separate literature has examined the ability of forensic assessment instruments to distinguish between competent and incompetent defendants. Measures such as the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool—Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT‐CA) and Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial—Revised (ECST‐R) have shown promise as tools to inform evaluators' judgments of adjudicative competency (Fogel, Schiffman, Mumley, Tillbrook, & Grisso, ). However, surveys of practicing forensic evaluators suggest that these measures are rarely used.…”

Competence to stand trial and criminalization: an overview of the research

“…63 Approximately onethird of individuals age 60 years or older who are referred for competency evaluations are deemed incompetent 64 and, compared to younger incompetent defendants, restoration rates for older individuals are much lower. 65 Frierson et al 66 compared geriatric defendants found incompetent to stand trial with their competent counterparts and found that the most common variables associated with incompetence were older age, presence of dementia, presence of other memory and concentration impairments, and deficits in orientation. Concerns over individual constitutional rights (eg, Jackson time limits) are elevated for competency determinations of elderly defendants as research shows that these defendants are unlikely to benefit from restorative treatment.…”

“…Concerns over individual constitutional rights (eg, Jackson time limits) are elevated for competency determinations of elderly defendants as research shows that these defendants are unlikely to benefit from restorative treatment. 65 There is a need for additional research with elderly defendants to further develop our understanding of the implications of age and related impairments on competency evaluation and determination.…”