Treating incompetent defendants: The Supreme Court's decision is a tough Sell

Psychiatric Services

Volumn 54, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 1335-1336+1341

  Appelbaum, Paul S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HALOPERIDOL;

CASE REPORT; COMPETENCE; COURT; DELUSION; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; FORGERY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LAW; MALE; MEDICAID; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; PRISON; PSYCHIATRIST; REVIEW;

LEGAL APPROACH; MENTAL HEALTH THERAPIES; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP;

ANTIPSYCHOTIC AGENTS; COMMITMENT OF MENTALLY ILL; DANGEROUS BEHAVIOR; DELUSIONS; DENTISTS; FRAUD; HALLUCINATIONS; HUMANS; INSANITY DEFENSE; MALE; MENTAL COMPETENCY; PRISONERS; PSYCHOTIC DISORDERS; TREATMENT REFUSAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 10744229589     PISSN: 10752730     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.54.10.1335     Document Type: Review

References (10)

1. Sell v US, No 02-5664 (June 16, 2003)
2. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 28, See 549.43
3. Memorandum and Order of United States Magistrate Judge, US v Sell, No 4:98CR177 DJS, 4:97CR290 DJS (consolidated) (ED Mo, Aug 9, 2000)
4. US v Sell, No 4:97CR290-DJS, 4:98CR177-DJS (ED Mo, Apr 4, 2001)
5. US v Sell, 282 E3d 560 (Sth Cir 2002)
6. Washington v Harper, 494 US 210 (1990)
7. Riggins v Nevada, 504 US 127 (1992)
8. Klein D: Trial rights and psychotropic drugs: the case against administering involuntary medication to a defendant during trial. Vanderbilt Law Review 55:165-218, 2002
9. Brief amicus curiae of the American Psychological Association, Sell v US, No 025664 (June 16, 2003)
10. US v Weston, 255 F.3d 873 (DC Cir 2001)