Death row delusions: When is a prisoner competent to be executed?

Psychiatric Services

Volumn 58, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 1258-1260

  Appelbaum, Paul S ^a  

^a NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPETENCE; COMPREHENSION; COURT; DECISION MAKING; DELUSION; HUMAN; JUSTICE; LEGAL ASPECT; MENTAL DISEASE; MENTAL HEALTH; PRISONER; PUNISHMENT; SHORT SURVEY; STANDARD; UNITED STATES; ARTICLE; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HOMICIDE; JURISPRUDENCE; MALE; MENTAL CAPACITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT;

FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HOMICIDE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL COMPETENCY; PRISONERS; SUPREME COURT DECISIONS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 35748984088     PISSN: 10752730     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.58.10.1258     Document Type: Short Survey

References (7)

1. Ford v Wainwright, 477 US 399 (1986)
2. Panetti v Quarterman, 127 S Ct 2842 (2007)
3. Panetti v Dretke, 401 F Supp 2d 702 (WD Tex 1004)
4. Barnard v Collins, 13 F 3d 871 (5th Cir 1994)
5. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS: Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment: A Guide for Physicians and Other Health Professionals. New York, Oxford University Press, 1998
6. In re Guardianship of Roe, 421 NE 2d 40 (Mass 1981)
7. Brief Amicus Curiae of American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Alliance on Mental Illness, Panetti v Quarterman, 127 S Ct 2842 (2007)