Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Neuropsychological Evaluation of Competency in Criminal Forensic Contexts

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Competency issues can arise at any point beginning with an individual’s initial interaction with the justice system until the same individual is facing the imposition of a sentence. Neuropsychologists are commonly introduced to the criminal arena through referrals related to competence issues, and much can be gained from understanding how cognitive and psychological functioning can impact an individual’s ability to understand and appreciate current circumstances. The present article focuses on three less frequently explored domains of competency, including competence to waive Miranda rights, competence to consent to or refuse treatment, and competency for execution. Pertinent diagnostic considerations are discussed, and relevant legal standards and ethical issues are described. Lastly, evaluation procedures for each type of competence evaluation are discussed. This primer on competency assessment offers a review of the current practices, and limitations, in this burgeoning intersection of law, brain–behavior relationships, and psychology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerson, K. S., Brodsky, S. L. & Zapf, P. A. (2005). Judges’ and psychologists’ assessments of legal and clinical factors in competence for execution. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 164–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Bar Association (1989). American Bar Association criminal justice mental health standards. Washington: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. American Psychologist, 68, 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2010). American Psychological Association ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

  • Applebaum, P. (1986). Competence to be executed: Another conundrum for mental health professionals. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 37, 682–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, P. S. (2006). Decisional capacity of patients with schizophrenia to consent to research: Taking stock. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 32(1), 22–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, P. S. & Grisso, T. (1995). The MacArthur treatment competence study I: Mental illness and competence to consent to treatment. Law and Human Behavior, 19(2), 105–126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002).

  • Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. (2010).

  • Blackstone, W. (1978). Commentaries on the laws of England (9th ed.). New York: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanton, D. J. & Dagenais, P. A. (2007). Comparison of language skills of adjudicated and nonadjudicated adolescent males and females. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38, 309–314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brodsky, S. (1990). Professional ethics and professional morality in the assessment of competence for execution: A response to Bonnie. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 91–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodsky, S. L., Zapf, P. A. & Boccaccini, M. T. (2001). The last competency: An examination of legal, ethical, and professional ambiguities regarding evaluation of competence for execution. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 1, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S., Ruff, R., Troster, A., Barth, J., Koffler, S. & Silver, C. R. (2005). Symptom validity assessment: Practice issues and medical necessity NAN policy & planning committee. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, 419–426.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, V. G. & Zapf, P. (2008). Psychiatric patients’ comprehension of Miranda rights. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 390–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (1993). Physician participation in capital punishment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 270, 365–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, M. D. & Goldstein, A. M. (2003). Sentencing determinations in death penalty cases. In A. M. Goldstein & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Forensic psychology, Vol. 11, pp. 407–436). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, M. D. & Vigen, M. P. (2002). Death row inmate characteristics, adjustment, and confinement: A critical review of the literature. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 20, 191–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deitchman, M. A., Kennedy, W. A. & Beckham, J. C. (1991). Self-selection factors in the participation of mental health professionals in competency for execution evaluations. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 287–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeMatteo, D., Murrie, D. C., Anumba, N. M. & Keesler, M. E. (2011). Forensic mental health assessments in death penalty cases. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Denney, R. L. & Tyner, E. A. (2010). Criminal law, competency, insanity, and dangerousness: Competency to proceed. In A. M. Horton Jr. & L. C. Hartlage (Eds.), Handbook of forensic neuropsychology (2nd ed., pp. 211–233). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickerson v. U.S., 166 F.3d 667 (2000).

  • Eastwood, J. & Snook, B. (2012). The effect of listenability factors on the comprehension of police cautions. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 177–183.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert, B. (2001). Competency to be executed: A proposed instrument to evaluate an inmates’ level of competency in light of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against the execution of the presently insane. Law and Psychology Review, 25, 29–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fare v. Michael C., 442 U.S. 707 (1979).

  • Ferris, R. (1997). Psychiatry and the death penalty. Psychiatric Bulletin, 21, 746–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida v. Powell, 559 U.S. (2010).

  • Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986).

  • Freedman, A. M. & Halpern, A. L. (1999). The psychiatrists’ dilemma: A conflict of roles in legal executions. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 33, 629–635.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frumkin, B. (2000). Competency to waive Miranda rights: Clinical and legal issues. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter, 24, 326–331.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fulero, S. M. & Everington, C. (1995). Assessing competency to waive Miranda rights in defendants with mental retardation. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 533–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, D. P., Dougherty, E. J., Jackson, R. M., Podboy, J. W. & Zimmerman, M. L. (2009). Retrospective evaluation of Miranda reading levels and waiver competency. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 19(2), 75–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (1998). Forensic evaluation of juveniles. Sarasota: Professional Resource Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (2003). Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and instruments (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (2010). Guidance for improving forensic reports: A review of common errors. Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 2, 102–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudjonsson, G. H. (1992). The psychology of interrogations, confessions, and testimony. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C. (2003). Mental health issues in long-term solitarity and “supermax” confinement. Crime and Delinquency, 49, 124–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper v. Washington, 494 U.S. 210, 1990.

  • Heilbrun, K. S. (1987). The assessment of competency for exertion: An overview. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 5, 383–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilbrun, K. S. & McClaren, H. A. (1988). Assessment of competency for execution: A guide for mental health professionals. The Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 16, 205–216.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Illinois v. Higgins, 278 N.E.2d 68 (1993).

  • Kavanagh, L., Rowe, D., Hersch, J., Barnett, K. J. & Reznik, R. (2010). Neurocognitive deficits and psychiatric disorders in a NSW prison population. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33, 20–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, M. M. & Marcopulos, B. A. (2012). Cognition in schizophrenia. In B. Marcopulos & M. Kurtz (Eds.), Clinical neuropsychological foundations of schizophrenia (pp. 1–25). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leong, G. B., Weinstock, R., Silva, J. A. & Eth, S. (1993). Psychiatry and the death penalty: The past decade. Psychiatric Annals, 23, 41–47.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leong, G. B., Silva, J. A., Weinstock, R. & Ganzini, L. (2000). Survey of forensic psychiatrists on evaluation and treatment of prisoners on death row. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 427–432.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marcopulos, B. A., Fuji, D., O’Grady, J., Shaver, G., Manley, J. & Aucone, E. (2008a). Providing neuropsychological services for persons with schizophrenia: A review of the literature and prescription for practice. In J. Morgan & J. Ricker (Eds.), Textbook of clinical neuropsychology (pp. 734–761). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcopulos, B. A., Morgan, J. E. & Denney, R. L. (2008b). Neuropsychological evaluation of competency to proceed. In R. L. Denney & J. P. Sullivan (Eds.), Clinical neuropsychology in the criminal forensic setting (pp. 176–203). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marson, D. C., Hebert, K. & Solomon, A. C. (2012). Assessing civil competencies in older adults with dementia: Consent capacity, financial capacity, and testamentary capacity. In G. Larrabee (Ed.), Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach (2nd ed., pp. 401–437). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G. & Slobogin, C. (Eds.). (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, H. (2001). Miller-forensic assessment of symptoms test (M-FAST): Professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. D. (1988). Evaluation of and treatment for competency to be execution: A national survey and an analysis. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 16, 67–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minzenberg, M. J., Laird, A. R., Thelen, S., Carter, C. S. & Glahn, D. C. (2009). Meta-analysis of 41 functional neuroimaging studies of executive function in schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66(8), 811–822.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

  • Moberg, P. J. & Kniele, K. (2006). Evaluation of competency: Ethical considerations for neuropsychologists. Applied Neuropsychology, 13(2), 101–114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe, M. L., Klebe, K. J., Stucker, A., Sturm, K., & Leggett, W. (2010). One year longitudinal study of the psychological effects of administrative segregation. Final report submitted to National Institute of Justice. Grant No. 2006-IJ-CS-0015. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/232973.pdf

  • Oberlander, L. B. & Goldstein, N. E. (2001). A review and update on the practice of evaluating Miranda comprehension. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 19, 453–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otto, R. K. (2009). Meaningufl consideration of competence to be executed. In R. F. Schopp, R. L. Wierner, B. H. Bornstein & S. L. Willborn (Eds.), Mental disorder and criminal law: Responsibility, punishment, and competence (pp. 191–204). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Owiti, J., & Bowers, L. (2010). A literature review: Refusal of psychotropic medication in acute inpatient psychiatric care. Report from the Conflict and Containment Reduction Research Programme. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from http://www.kcl.ac.uk/iop/depts/hspr/research/ciemh/mhn/projects/litreview/LitRevMedsref.pdf

  • Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007), remanded, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107438 (W.D. Tex. 2008).

  • Pirelli, G. & Zapf, P. A. (2008). An investigation of psychologists’ practices and attitudes toward participation in capital evaluations. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 8, 39–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirelli, G., Gottdiener, W. H. & Zapf, P. A. (2011). A meta-analytic review of competency to stand trial research. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17(1), 1–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, G., Gudjonsson, G. H. & Kelly, T. P. (1995). Interrogative suggestibility in an adolescent forensic population. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 211–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. 127, 1992

  • Rogers, R., Harrison, K. S., Shuman, D. W., Sewell, K. W., & Hazelwood, L. L. (2007). An analysis of Miranda warnings and waivers: Comprehension and coverage. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 177–192. doi:10.1007/s10979-006-9054-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Hazelwood, L. L., Sewell, K. W., Blackwood, H. L., Rogstad, J. E. & Harrison, K. S. (2009). Development and initial validation of the Miranda vocabulary Scale. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 381–392.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Jordan, M. J. & Harrison, J. S. (2004). A critical review of published competency-to-confess measures. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 707–718.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Rogstad, J. E., Steadham, J. A. & Drogin, E. Y. (2011a). In plain English: Avoiding recognized problems with Miranda miscomprehension. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 264–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Gillard, N. D., Wooley, C. N. & Fiduccia, C. E. (2011b). Decrements in Miranda abilities: An investigation of situational effects via a mock-crime paradigm. Law and Human Behavior, 35, 392–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W. & Gillard, N. D. (2010). Structured interview of reported symptoms (2nd ed.). Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. & Shuman, D. (2000). Conducting insanity evaluations (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rost, G. C. & McGregor, K. K. (2012). Miranda rights comprehension in young adults with specific language impairment. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 21, 101–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rudnick, A. (2002). Depression and competence to refuse psychiatric treatment. Journal of Medical Ethics, 28, 151–155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryba, N. L., Brodsky, S. L. & Shlosberg, A. (2007). Competency to waive Miranda rights evaluations: A survey of practitioners’ use of the Grisso instruments. Assessment, 14, 300–309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166, 2003

  • Tombaugh, T. N. (1997). TOMM: Test of memory malingering manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Loughner, 672 F.3d 731, 2012

  • Weinstock, R., Leong, G. B. & Silva, J. A. (2010). Competence to be executed: An ethical analysis post Panetti. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 690–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, P. A., Boccaccini, M. T. & Brodsky, S. L. (2003). Assessment of competency for execution: Professional guidelines and an evaluation checklist. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 21, 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, P. A. (2008). Competency for execution. In R. Jackson (Ed.), Learning forensic assessment (pp. 239–261). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, P. A. (2009). Elucidating the contours of competency for execution: The implications of Ford and Panetti for the assessment of CFE. Journal of Psychiatry and the Law, 37, 269–307.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bellevue Hospital Center, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

    Chriscelyn M. Tussey

  2. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA

    Bernice A. Marcopulos

  3. Western State Hospital, Staunton, VA, USA

    Beth A. Caillouet

  4. University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Beth A. Caillouet

Authors
  1. Chriscelyn M. Tussey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernice A. Marcopulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Beth A. Caillouet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chriscelyn M. Tussey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tussey, C.M., Marcopulos, B.A. & Caillouet, B.A. Neuropsychological Evaluation of Competency in Criminal Forensic Contexts. Psychol. Inj. and Law 6, 31–40 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9143-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9143-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation