Download PSYC 2080 EXAM 2 VERIFIED ACCURATE STUDY GUIDE and more Exams Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!
PSYC 2080 EXAM 2 VERIFIED ACCURATE STUDY
GUIDE
deposition - Answers - potential witnesses are questioned by the attorneys for opposing side; under oath in the presence of court recorder; typically away from courtroom; info- gathering Jenkins vs. United States - Answers - ruled that the lack of a medical degree did not automatically disqualify psychologists from providing expert testimony on the issue of mental disorder; before then it was just psychiatrists allowed to give expert testimony because they have MD degree 2 general types of courts - Answers - 1. federal court
- state court federal court - Answers - interpret the US constitution/acts of congress; settle disputes between states or citizens of different states; specialized matters such as bankruptcies, copyrights, or patents. state courts - Answers - interpret/apply state constitutions/laws passed by states and settle disputes between citizens of the same state or between the state government and citizens of that same state 3 types of jurisdiction - Answers - 1. general
- limited
- appellate general jurisdiction - Answers - have broad authority over an array of both simple and complex cases; both civil and criminal. limited jurisdiction - Answers - they can only settle small disputes or deal with preliminary issues in a major case appellate jurisdiction - Answers - a. court's authority to appeal regarding decision of lower courts. 2 types of appointments - Answers - time-limited lifetime (ex: supreme court) what branch of government is the federal courts? - Answers - usually judicial but some are executive (ex: DACA)
DACA - Answers - Policy that would provide deportation relief to those brought to this country as children; Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals granting certiorari - Answers - 4 of the 9 supreme court justices must agree to hear the case. the supreme court will heart the case types of state courts - Answers - - municipal courts/city courts/night courts: lowest level
- county/parish court
- court of appeals (every state has a court of last resort)
- specialized courts (not military courts: that is a federal court!!) municipal courts/city courts/night courts: lowest level - Answers - lowest level courts These courts typically cannot conduct major civil trials or felony trials. limited jurisdiction county/parish court - Answers - a. - general jurisdiction handling wide range of civil and criminal cases. appellate courts (court of last resort) - Answers - every state has a court of last resort (aka the highest appellate court in that state); some states have two of them: one for civil and the other for criminal; not all states have intermediate appellate courts. military courts - Answers - one of the specialized courts in the federal system; matters related to crimes: theft, sexual assault, etc. AND offenses unique to the military: unauthorized absence without leave, desertion, failure to follow orders, conduct unbecoming, etc. civil vs criminal case - Answers - civil case - resolution of dispute between private individuals/organizations; the government may also be involved; for money or to force someone to do/stop doing something; at the end, no one goes to jail. criminal case - alleged violation of the law; government represented by prosecutor; brings action against the defendant. Mental Health Courts - Answers - a diversion program for mentally ill defendants in which a judge, prosecutor, and probation officer play proactive roles and monitor the progress of clients through weekly visits to a courtroom stages of the trial (5) - Answers - 1. pretrial stage
- arraignment
- discovery process
- trial
- disposition
- appeals
ii. Bond - you pay it and do NOT receive it back when you show up for court again. preventative detention - Answers - A law that allows judges to order an accused person to stay in jail without bail when there is good reason to believe that the person will commit another serious crime before trial judge considers the dangerousness of the defendant; can deny bail if they are a flight risk or considered highly dangerous. Forensic psychologists may be asked to do a risk assessment. ways the defendant can plead: - Answers - 1. guilty
- not guilty
- nolo condendere
- not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI)
- guilty but mentally ill (GBMI) pleading guilty - Answers - 90% to 95% of criminal defendants plead guilty at arraignment or change their not-guilty plea to guilty before a trial. nolo contendere - Answers - they will not contest the charges but are also not pleading guilty; in the criminal law system, this has the same effect as a guilty plea: a conviction is entered on record; also known as an Alfred plea. not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) plea - Answers - not-guilty plea by notice that the insanity defense will be used as a defense at their trial; this hardly ever works; remember, insanity is a LEGAL term, not a psychological term; "insane" means not responsible for their actions. Criminal responsibility (CR) or mental state at the time of the offense (MSO) evaluation - Answers - forensic psychologist examines the defendant and determines if insanity defense can be supported discovery process - Answers - each side makes info at its disposal available to the other side in preparation for their case
- defendant side does not have to reveal info that could inculpate (make them look more guilty)
- prosecution DOES have to reveal info that could exculpate (clear) the defendant
- if insanity defense is used, need to release the formal report types of trials - Answers - 1. bench trial
- jury trial bench trial - Answers - no jury: decided by the judge/magistrate jury trial - Answers - select jurors from jury pool; psychologists may consult.
voir dire - Answers - potential jurors questioned by lawyers; maybe by judge When jury consultants are involved, they have often gathered information about potential jurors from public records or even from interviews with their acquaintances. The lawyer can then use this information in forming questions to ask of a potential juror, but the judge will not necessarily allow them. The consultant also may sit at the defense or prosecution table and make inferences based on a potential juror's nonverbal behavior or reaction to questions. 2 ways an attorney can challenge to remove a juror - Answers - 1. peremptory challenge
- challenge for cause peremptory challenge - Answers - "just do it because i said so!"; allows lawyer to reject a potential juror without stating the reason; cannot be discriminatory; there is a limit to how many of these a lawyer can use. Cannot be exercised on the basis of race or gender. If the presiding judge suspects that this is being done, the judge must inquire into the lawyer's reasons to ensure that the peremptory challenge is not being used in a discriminatory fashion. challenge for cause - Answers - specific legal reason for removal or a juror is offered; ex: the juror knows the defendant personally or if it is a death penalty case and the person could not bring themselves to vote for the death penalty under any circumstances; no limit to how many of these can be used because they address legal issues. disposition stage, aka sentencing stage - Answers - the judge reads the verdict and the sentencing when a judge or jury renders a verdict of not guilty, the case is over and the defendant is free to go, unless the defendant has been found not guilty by reason of insanity.
- free to go
- institutionalized (NGRI)
- jail
- death penalty presentencing evaluation report - Answers - social history: info about the offender's family, employment, education, substance abuse, criminal history, medical needs, mental health history, etc. among other factors. PSI reports often include a victim impact statement, which is a summary of what the victim suffered—both physically and emotionally—as a result of the crime. Victims themselves as well as people close to them also have the right to speak out at sentencing. Psychologists may add to these reports.
brief also cited numerous scholarly sources on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and both sexual and gender stereotyping. The brief emphasized that sexual and gender minorities face significant harmful stigma in the workplace. scientific jury selection - Answers - A. application of social science techniques in effort to find a jury that will be favorably disposed toward one's case.
- This process may include attitude surveys within the community in an attempt to determine representative views on matters dealing with the upcoming case. Trial consultants often conduct surveys, set up focus groups, interview community members, and employ other research strategies to try to help predict who will likely be a good juror for their client. change of venue - Answers - change of the location of the trial Lawyers may be concerned that publicity could affect their case. Trial consultants may be asked to conduct surveys of the community and collect evidence of negative publicity, which would support a motion for a change of venue (change in the location of the trial). shadow juries - Answers - groups of people similar to jurors in demographic characteristics and possible outcomes; consulted on a regular basis to see how they would react to various aspects of the proceedings.
- Once the trial is over, consultants may interview members of the jury, to understand their decision making, and how effective the lawyer's strategy was. witness preparation - Answers - 1. Trial consultants also help attorneys prepare witnesses and determine effective strategies for presenting evidence and persuading jurors. Lawyers need to review testimony of their witnesses, but they may also use a trial consultant to coach a witness in how to be persuasive and confident.
- Remember from Ch. 3 - rehearsal makes people feel more confident, but can reduce accuracy. This is especially true if the questions during preparation are leading or suggestive. the voir dire - Answers - 1. consultant may suggest Voir Dire questions to the lawyers; make inferences about prospective jury members based on responses and nonverbal behavior.
- trying to determine if potential jurors may be biased against the defendant's racial, ethnic, religious, gender group. expert testimony - Answers - I. The role of an expert witness is to help the judge or the jury in making decisions about matters that are beyond the knowledge of the typical layperson.
Clinical psychologists are also frequently called to testify about the results of evaluations they have conducted. a. many times, simply submit reports to judge/attorney. b. if there is a dispute over findings, may be asked to testify in court. c. May be opposing testimony provided by a psychologist from the other side. factors that determine how the jury responds to expert testimony: - Answers - a. The testimony is clinical, rather than research-based. (interactions with people) b. The expert receives no payment for their testimony. (no bribes allowed) c. The expert is from the local community. (relatable and outcome affects them too) d. Experts seem knowledgeable, but not arrogant. (need to be neutral and likeable) e. Experts resist giving opinions on legal matters unless pressed. (objective!!) credentials - Answers - degree/licensing/certification; research or practical experience in the matter that the expert is testifying to. must be established for expert testimony The judge then decides whether or not to accept them as an expert. Some states have specific requirements for psychologists to be involved in court cases, assessment or testimony. 2 standards for admitting evidence to be used in court: - Answers - 1. Daubert standard (currently used)
- Frye standard (not used anymore) Daubert standard - Answers - if the opposing lawyer challenges introduction of evidence, the judge must decide whether the evidence is reliable, legally sufficient, and relevant to the case at hand. **this is the standard currently used makes judges more likely to exclude evidence, but not better at determining "junk science" from valid evidence Frye standard - Answers - aka the general acceptance rule; states that the expert's evidence must have been gathered using scientific techniques that had reached a general acceptance in the science field. Once that standard had been met, all relevant testimony would be admissible. Replaced later by the Daubert standard. the evidence in question must be "generally accepted" by the scientific community true or false: the Daubert standard was effective at making sure the evidence presented in court is valid. - Answers - FALSE:
- makes judges more likely to exclude evidence, but not better at determining "junk science" from valid evidence
c. The UNDUE INFLUENCE of the expert. Expert's opinion may greatly influence the judge/jury: their decision must be made on legal fact; research has shown this issue/influence in pretrial motions. supporters of expert testimony - Answers - Judges often depend on this testimony, and such testimony can be carefully controlled, particularly by means of effective cross- examination. Judges and lawyers are becoming increasingly sophisticated about possible sources of error in an expert's opinion. In pretrial proceedings in both criminal and civil cases, judges typically ask an opinion of the clinician who has been appointed by the court and who is acceptable to both parties. These court officers have come to value and trust the professional's opinion as a result of having that person involved in past cases. Forensic psychology has developed rapidly, and many graduate and postgraduate programs now offer internships, specialized training, and other opportunities for psychologists and other clinicians to learn the laws. Quality of evaluations has improved significantly over the past decade. true or false: many forensic psychologists never testify in court proceedings. - Answers - true Furthermore, even those who consult often with lawyers, say a small percentage of the cases they help with (5%-10%) involve courtroom testimony. cross examination - Answers - The questioning of an opposing witness during a trial.
- often more personal than content based, such as by asking experts if they are being paid to appear.
- it is not unusual for cross-examining attorneys to berate or insult experts, their field of study, or methods used in their research. pretrial preparation of expert witness - Answers - is essential, and psychologists should not allow themselves to be persuaded to enter the courtroom without advance notice and sufficient preparation time
- advised to gather information carefully, pay attention to details of the case and the legal issues involved, remain impartial, and keep clear, organized notes risk assessment/violence risk assessment - Answers - - predicts likelihood that a particular individual will be dangerous to self or others
- It is one of the most common tasks performed by forensic psychologists, and it is also extensively researched.
- probability statement based on "predictor variables" that have been shown in people who have re-offended to see if this person is likely to re-offend ****People are rated on number of these variables they have in their present lives/backgrounds, with some factors being weighted more heavily than others. An
individual with a score below the cut-off for a particular risk assessment instrument would be judged as high risk of offending again. ****The more general the measures, the more accurate they tend to be; compared to less accurate specific measures. can violence be predicted? - Answers - For the most part, courts have allowed clinicians to make predictions but have also acknowledged their fallibility. behavior cannot be predicted 100% because there is capacity for change fallibility of risk assessment - Answers - Today, forensic psychologists are careful to point out the fallibility of behavioral prediction. Although they acknowledge that prediction is an important aspect of the services they provide to courts and other institutions, they are carefully guarded in their conclusions. When it comes to predicting violence, virtually everyone now prefers the terms risk assessment or the assessment of dangerousness potential rather than prediction of dangerousness. More sophisticated models of risk assessment view dangerousness as highly dependent on situations and circumstances, constantly subject to change, and varying along a continuum of probability. Someone who was considered potentially dangerous at one point in his life may have experienced life changes that make it unlikely he will continue to be a danger to self or others. clinical assessments vs actuarial assessments (what are they and which one is better?)
- Answers - Clinical assessments— rely on clinical experience and professional judgement; not as accurate when compared with actuarial; uses opinions based on meeting/interacting with defendant. actuarial instruments - statistical models that rely on measurable, valid risk factors have been, in a majority of cases, superior to clinical judgment or professional opinion. Early research almost invariably supported the use of actuarial prediction over clinical. actuarial instruments... - Answers - a. focus on a small number of factors and may ignore important factors that are idiosyncratic to the case at hand (e.g., recent legal or medical problems); b. are PASSIVE predictors, focusing primarily on relatively static variables, such as demographics and criminal history; c. may include risk factors that are UNACCEPTABLE ON LEGAL GROUNDS, such as race or sex, and may ignore risk factors that have UNKNOWN VALIDITY but are logical to consider (such as threats of violence); d. have been developed to predict a specific outcome over a specific period in a specific population, and they may not generalize to other contexts e. have a restricted definition of violence risk and cannot address the nature of the violence, its duration, its severity or frequency, or how soon it may occur.
appreciate the charges brought against them AND be able to assist their attorney in their own defense. The typical cost of a competency evaluation for one defendant is $5,000. mental health courts - Answers - certain defendants charged with misdemeanors or lesser felonies are well known to police, the judicial system, and the mental health system. They continually appear before the court, are sent for competency evaluation, are found incompetent to stand trial (or competent), are hospitalized (or not), have charges dropped (or plead guilty), spend time on probation (or in jail), and go forth into the community until their next criminal charge intended to prevent the perpetuation of this revolving-door process by diverting primarily nonviolent individuals with mental disorders from the criminal process and providing community supervision and meaningful treatment. who can raise the question of competency? - Answers - - defense attorney
- prosecution
- judge lawyers do not always seek competency evaluations for their clients. why? - Answers - - Lawyer resistant to having client institutionalized
- Time/cost involved (whoever requests the competency eval is responsible for the cost)
- Belief that client is better served if case is disposed of quickly due to a plea bargain.
- Lawyer may not know that deficits such as intellectual disability may render a defendant not competent. adjudicative competence - Answers - ability to participate in legal proceedings, including plea bargaining and participating in a criminal trial.
- road enough to subsume a wide range of abilities defendants are expected to possess. Richard Bonnie - Answers - suggested that CST must involve both "competency to proceed" (i understand what is going on in the proceedings) and "decisional competency." (i understand the choices i am making) competency to proceed - Answers - I understand what is happening around me (how to courts work, etc.) decisional competency - Answers - I understand the outcomes of the decisions I am making through this process what must be true of a decision to waive constitutional rights? - Answers - must be knowing, intelligent, and valid
dusky standard - Answers - defendant must be able to: 1. Understand/appreciate the criminal proceedings and 2. Assist attorneys in their own defense why are people referred for competency evals? - Answers - past history of psychological problems or are currently showing signs of psych disorder (intellectual disability, dementia, old age, etc.) who owns the report when... a. the defense requests and pays for the evaluation b. the evaluation is court ordered (also say if the report has to be shared!) - Answers - When the defense requests and pays for the evaluation - private evaluation of the defendant; the client is the person being examined; the report goes to the defense attorney; they DO NOT have to share the report with the court if they do not want to. When the evaluation is court ordered - the defendant is evaluated, but the client is the court; can be requested by defense attorney (if the client is unable to pay), prosecutor, or judge; since the client is the court, the results are shared with the whole court. Essentially whoever pays for the report owns the report. err on the side of caution in CST - Answers - If there is more than one evaluator and they disagree as to whether the defendant is CST, the judge is more likely to find the defendant incompetent. This is likely because, when there is doubt, the judge prefers to err on the side of caution the assessment of adjudicative competence should begin with - Answers - a notice to the person being evaluated of the limits of confidentiality and the purpose of the evaluation Factors common to forensic mental health assessments: Before meeting with the person being assessed, the examiner should - Answers - · understand the purpose of the referral · decline to conduct the evaluation if there is a conflict of interest or if the examiner has ethical or moral objections to participating · gather background information and records when available · be knowledgeable about the law relative to the assessment · clarify and agree on the method of payment and when it will be made · clarify when a report is needed and to whom it should be submitted. Factors common to forensic mental health assessments: Before conducting the evaluation, the examiner should - Answers - · explain its purpose to the person being evaluated · stress that this is not a treatment relationship · explain the limits to confidentiality · warn the examinee of the possible uses of the examination
evaluation of competency to stand trial - REVISED - Answers - an interview-based instrument that focuses on the Dusky standard, such as by inquiring into the degree to which defendants understand the role of their lawyers. A main feature of this instrument is its ability to detect malingering Using the (ECST-R), Vitacco, Rogers, Gabel, and Munizza (2007) found suspected malingering in about one fifth of a sample of persons evaluated for competency to stand trial The Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) - Answers - a well-regarded instrument for detecting the malingering of psychotic symptoms. burden of proof - Answers - the obligation to present evidence to support one's claim 3 types of proof - Answers - 1. preponderance of evidence
- clear and convincing evidence
- beyond reasonable doubt preponderance of evidence - Answers - preponderance = "the quality or fact of being greater in number, quantity, or importance." proof that one side has more evidence than the other; it is the standard required in most civil suits and may be relevant to criminal proceedings as well.
- DEFENDANTS MUST PROVE THEY ARE INCOMPETENT BY AT LEAST THIS MUCH EVIDENCE clear and convincing evidence - Answers - intermediate standard of evidence; reasonable certainty of the truth The standard of proof required in some civil cases and, in federal courts, the standard of proof necessary for a defendant to make a successful claim of insanity. beyond reasonable doubt - Answers - HIGHEST standard of evidence proof; required in ALL criminal proceedings and delinquency proceedings; proof just short of absolute certainty true or false: a serous mental disorder is sufficient to deem someone incompetent to stand trial. - Answers - FALSE: Although mental disorder seems to be a requirement for most incompetency determinations, mental disorder itself-even serious mental disorder—is not sufficient. true or false: forensic psychologists should include the mental disorder dx in their competency reports. - Answers - Forensic psychologists are often advised not to include
diagnoses in their reports, because diagnoses are often subjective, and they are labels that can carry undue weight with judges, lawyers, and juries who are not mental health professionals. In the case of competency evaluations, courts need to be made aware of the functional abilities of the defendants, and as noted previously, the reports should be crafted to the requirements of that particular case. Even with an established and valid diagnosis, a defendant may understand the legal process and be able to help the defense attorney, while other individuals without an established diagnosis, who do not have a mental disorder, may not be able to understand the process or help their attorneys. The Dx may hold undue influence in the courtroom. Just need to establish the specific symptoms and how those symptoms affect the defendant. what happens once a person is ruled incompetent? - Answers - efforts are made to restore the person to competence so as to proceed with the trial. This is usually achieved through the administration of psychotropic medication. Clinicians typically are asked to make some assessment of the likelihood that an individual will be restored to competency or even estimate how long this will take, which is not an easy or often accurate determination. · If restoration to competency is highly unlikely, the state must decide whether to DROP the criminal charges or not, and if necessary initiate involuntary civil commitment proceedings. (not to be taken lightly: no limit to how long they could be held for) · Person may be sent to psych hospital or mandated to receive treatment on out-patient basis. Jackson vs indiana - Answers - the U.S. Supreme Court placed a limit on the confinement of defendants found incompetent to stand trial, ruling that they could not be held indefinitely if there was no likelihood that they would be restored. However, they can be subjected to civil commitment competency restoration - Answers - treatment given to someone found incompetent to stand trial; purpose = make them competent to stand trial. Gay et al: what tends to predict nonrestoration? - Answers - certain psychotic and neuropsychological symptoms predicted nonrestoration. A diagnosis of intellectual disability and a greater number of psychotic and manic symptoms also make it unlikely that competency will be restored. intellectual ability and competence - Answers - Intellectual disability does not guarantee that an individual will not be held responsible for a crime. Furthermore, persons with a mild intellectual disability may try to "hide" this disability, even from their lawyers. Thus, the issue is not raised either in pretrial evaluations or in mitigation for the offense, if the individual is convicted.
excused - People may be excused rather than justified because they did not possess the necessary mens rea; EX: BOMB STRAPPED TO CHEST, INSTRUCTED TO ROB BANK UNDER EXTREME DURESS insanity - Answers - judicial determination that an individual's mental disorder relieves them of criminal responsibility for illegal actions; did not possess mens rea when they committed the crime. Insanity excuses criminal conduct but does not justify it. competency vs sanity - Answers - a. Competency - mental state at the time of the criminal justice proceedings; affects your ability to waive your rights, plead guilty, stand trial, etc. b. Sanity - also known as criminal responsibility; mental state at thr time of the crime. criminal responsibility (CR) or mental state at the time of the offense (MSO) - Answers - evaluations of SANITY insanity defense reform act - Answers - federal law passed in 1984; made it harder for defendant to use the insanity defense; changed the standard for determining insanity in federal court.
- sets the standard for insanity cases in federal courts volitional prong - Answers - acknowledged in some states; states that, because of a serious disorder, an individual was unable to conform to the requirement of the law. Even if a person knew the difference between right and wrong and was aware that what they were doing was wrong, evidence of an inability to control behavior satisfies the standard. For example, in these states a person who—as the result of a mental disorder—is compelled by "voices" to kill the victim could be excused. These states are in the minority, with only 16 accepting a volitional prong. Kahler vs Kansas - Answers - - The insanity defense is not constitutionally required.
- 4 family victims murdered: James Kahler's wife, Caren Kahler, divorced him; then he drove to where she was staying with their 3 kids: shot Caren, their two daughters, and Caren's mother. He allowed his son to flee.
- Experts agreed that Kahler exhibited Major Depressive Disorder, paranoid and obsessive compulsive disorders, and other disorders; defense expert said Kahler "felt compelled" and "couldn't refrain from what he did"
- Kansas does not recognize any additional way that mental illness can produce an acquittal, such as not appreciating the wrongfulness or not being able to control his actions. Kahler was convicted and, despite bringing in his mental illness for the jury to consider at sentencing (allowed under Kansas law), he was sentenced to death.
how often does the insanity defense work in court? - Answers - even when an insanity defense is allowed, it is rarely successful. allowed in court 1-3% of time and actually works in 25% of those cases The following are a few reasons why it is harder for defendants today to be acquitted under the insanity defense: - Answers - · Federal government and states no longer allow defendants to claim they could not control their behavior (volitional prong does not help their case anymore): if they knew the difference between right and wrong, then they can still be held responsible. · Federal government and states now require defendant to prove their insanity by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance of evidence (the burden of proof is now on the defendant). · Some states have abolished the insanity defense; US supreme court ruled that it is not constitutionally required. · In federal courts and some states, forensic examiner is not allowed to express an ultimate opinion on whether the person is insane or not. · Public opinion polls: public has little sympathy for this defense, and often believes that the defendants who take it "get off too easily". This is especially true when they are charged with serious or violent crimes. Guilty but mentally ill (GBMI) - Answers - allows defendant to be found guilty while affording them treatment for mental disorders in correctional facility; great idea in theory, but we have seen a bad execution of it. A GBMI verdict makes little difference in the life of the person who obtains it, however. Defendants found guilty but mentally ill are still sent to prison and—on the whole—are no more likely to receive specialized treatment for their disorder than other imprisoned offenders. who tends to respond better to insanity defense: judge of jury? how do they each respond? - Answers - some research indicates JUDGES are more sympathetic to insanity defense than juries; bench trial = more likely to produce NGRI verdict; JURIES often do not realize that defendants found NGRI do not "go free", but are subject to civil commitment/hospitalization. *****If you are going for NGRI, request a bench trial!! Research indicates that juries sitting on cases involving the insanity defense rarely apply the tests for insanity, so changes in standards may not be that significant. Rather, insanity cases appear to be decided more on moral grounds/what jurors believe is the "right" decision rather than on correct legal grounds. dual purpose evals - Answers - evaluate for
- insanity
- competency
