I even amazed myself!
Read MoreTestamentary capacity and being “of sound mind” is an easy hurdle to clear. Many times, though, the idea of undue influence is not explored when contesting a person’s last will and testament. Colorado law has a lot to say about this issue.
Read MoreAn incorrectly diagnosed STD, family drama, loss of consortium, and a major lawsuit.
Read MoreThe ADX Supermax is the country’s most notorious prison. It is home to Al Qaeda, the Unabomber, and the 9-11 Mastermind. I have been inside of it.
Read MoreThe curious case from 1896 of the surgeon who defied a court order for reasons that are not entirely known.
Read MoreDue to the landmark legal decision in Ake v. Oklahoma (1985), states are required to provide access to psychologists if a person’s mental health is going to be a factor at trial or sentencing and the person couldn’t otherwise afford to hire one privately.
Read MoreIn Colorado, There are two different tests that can be applied, based on the landmark 2000 case of Breeden v. Stone (Breeden, 992 P.2d 1167 [Colo. 2000]): The Cunningham Test and the Insane Delusion Test. And in fact, if testamentary capacity is challenged in Colorado, Breeden dictates that a “sound mind” includes passing both tests.
Read MoreJudges and juries react to expert witnesses differently based on gender, and women have a number of challenges in this area that men do not face. Recent research and information about Social Role Theory are reviewed.
Read MoreDr. Grigson was hired to conduct a pretrial competency evaluation in 1973. The case involved Ernest Smith, who was arrested for participating in an armed robbery where an accomplice killed a grocery store clerk. Dr. Grigson reported that Mr. Smith was competent to stand trial and he labeled Mr. Smith a "severe sociopath."
Read MoreI read. A lot. I mostly choose fiction, and I have loved mysteries for most of my life. Here are quick reviews of the four books I read in January of 2019.
Read MoreWhen it comes to civil cases, little is known about competency. State laws do not provide a definition for competency to participate in a civil proceeding, and there is little research on the phenomenon. Yet, there are many times where an individual may get wrapped up in a civil case (divorce, probate matters, law suits, etc.) where they may not be competent to assist their attorneys or to understand what is happening in court and make rational decisions based on that understanding.
Read MoreIn a few classic stories, Sherlock enlists the help of his friend’s hound. Sherlock is always convinced he will sniff out the killer. Every time, the dog merely leads Sherlock around the city on a random adventure that leaves him no closer to solving the crime. But he still loves that dog.
Read MoreA lot of people kill other people. But not all of those murderers are psychopaths. One interesting way to understand the difference between psychopathic and non-psychopathic murderers is through their differing uses of language.
Read MoreA 2005 decision by the US Supreme Court makes it unconstitutional to execute anyone who committed murder prior to the age of 18. The details of the groundbreaking case of Roper v. Simmons are summarized here.
Read MoreThe upshot for attorneys: jurors take expert witness confidence into account and use it to make decisions about the credibility of the witness. It also affects their deliberations and trial outcomes, so find good witnesses, make sure they do solid work, and then prepare them for testimony.
Read MoreCooper v. Oklahoma (1996) is the United States Supreme Court decision that forced states to uniformly adopt the “preponderance of evidence” standard for criminal competency hearing.
Read MoreDue To The Testimony From Two Psychiatrists Willing To Say Anyone Is Highly Dangerous, Mental Health Professionals Are Now Allowed to Make Predictions of Future Violence
Read More