Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T05:36:39.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

48 - Restoration

The Sequel to Incompetency to Stand Trial

from Part VI - Perspectives from the Field

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2024

Monica K. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Reno
Logan A. Yelderman
Affiliation:
Prairie View A & M University, Texas
Matthew T. Huss
Affiliation:
Creighton University, Omaha
Jason A. Cantone
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Get access

Summary

Once a defendant is deemed incompetent to stand trial (IST), the evaluator must indicate whether restoration can occur within the foreseeable future. This restoration must occur in a “reasonable” – but undefined – period. If restorable and the defendant is in the community, an outpatient restoration program might be utilized but only if the defendant does not constitute a physical threat to the community. If the defendant is incarcerated, the restoration process will likely occur in a secure hospital setting or a jail setting. Unfortunately, not every jurisdiction has an outpatient restoration program or a jail restoration program. The nature of the crime often creates what I call a “justice” bias toward competency or the restoration process. The more heinous the crime the more likely the defendant is to be competent or IST but restorable.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gowensmith, W. N., & Frost, L. E. (2016). Looking for beds in all the wrong places: Outpatient competency restoration as a promising approach to modern challenges. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22, 239305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson v. Indiana, 406 US 715, 738 (US Supreme Court 1972). Justia Law. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/406/715/.Google Scholar
Ltc. (n.d.). Nebraska Legislature. Section 71–1107 Neb. Rev. Stat. https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=71-1107.Google Scholar
Ltc. (n.d.). Nebraska Legislature. Section 29–1823 Neb. Rev. Stat. https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=29-1823.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×