Download - Dusky v. U.S
-
8/10/2019 Dusky v. U.S
1/1
Terms and Conditions Find Browse Create Permanent Link Help
Results List| Edit Search| New Search| Home
Search within resultsw Full with Indexing
1 of 1
7 Duq. L. Rev. 441, *
ect Language
ered by Translate
Disclaimer
Copyright (c) 2009 Duquesne UniversityDuquesne Law Review
Spring, 2009
Duquesne Law Review
47 Duq. L. Rev. 441
TH:14586 words
NT DECISION: The United States Constitution Allows a State to Limit the Right of a Criminal Defendant to Represent Himself at Trial on the Gral Competence: Indiana v. Edwards
STITUTIONAL LAW -- CRIMINAL LAW -- MENTAL COMPETENCE -- RIGHT OF SELF-REPRESENTATION -- The United States Supreme Court heldndant who has been determined competent to stand trial is not necessarily competent to represent himself at trial and can therefore be prev
y the State.
na v. Edwards, 128 S. Ct. 2379(2008).
E:Patrick Manning
SNEXIS SUMMARY:
e Supreme Court cases that had examined the issue of "mental competency," Breyer wrote, established a standard which centered on a defendant's ability tounsel. ... Justice Scalia supported this contention by noting that Edwards's attorney made different arguments in his defense than those preferred by Edw
nters found nothing in the Sixth Amendment guaranteeing the right of self-representation. ... The two issues of competency to stand trial and a right to selfed, at least somewhat, in Godinez v. ... In Godinez, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had held that the standard of competency to wa
, including that of self-representation, was higher than that of the standard of competency to stand trial. ... The Court, in Godinez, reasoned that all crimina
her they plead guilty or not, may have to make difficult and important decisions once proceedings have been initiated against them. ... The Court, however, stinction between a defendant waiving the right to appointed counsel and actually representing himself at trial, a distinction that would be repeated in Edwa
will undoubtedly be a great deal of legal debate as to how to correctly interpret "voluntarily and knowingly" or "voluntarily and intelligently" in the context o
se of this service is subject to Source Directory: or | |
http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/lnacui2api/mungo/lexseestat.do?bct=A&risb=21_T20686239173&homeCsi=142665&A=0.5688946568651836&urlEnc=ISO-8859-1&&citeString=128%20S.%20Ct.%202379&countryCode=USA&_md5=00000000000000000000000000000000http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/lnacui2api/frame.do?tokenKey=rsh-20.910382.6503993236&target=results_DocumentContent&returnToKey=20_T20686239179&parent=docview&rand=1412698292921&reloadEntirePage=truehttps://translate.google.com/http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=142665&sr=AUTHOR(Manning)%2BAND%2BTITLE(The+United+States+Constitution+Allows+a+State+to+Limit+the+Right+of+a+Criminal+Defendant+to+Represent+Himself+at+Trial+on+the+Ground+of+a+Lack+of+Mental+Competence%3A+Indiana+v.+Edwards++CONSTITUTIONAL+LAW+--+CRIMINAL+LAW+--+MENTAL+COMPETENCE+--+RIGHT+OF+SELF-REPRESENTATION+--+The+United+States+Supreme+Court+held+that+a+criminal+defendant+who+has+been+determined+competent+to+stand+trial+is+not+necessarily+competent+to+represent+himself+at+trial+and+can+therefore+be+prevented+from+doing+so+by+the+State.++Indiana+v.+Edwards%2C+128+S.+Ct.+2379+)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2009#http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=142665&sr=AUTHOR(Manning)%2BAND%2BTITLE(The+United+States+Constitution+Allows+a+State+to+Limit+the+Right+of+a+Criminal+Defendant+to+Represent+Himself+at+Trial+on+the+Ground+of+a+Lack+of+Mental+Competence%3A+Indiana+v.+Edwards++CONSTITUTIONAL+LAW+--+CRIMINAL+LAW+--+MENTAL+COMPETENCE+--+RIGHT+OF+SELF-REPRESENTATION+--+The+United+States+Supreme+Court+held+that+a+criminal+defendant+who+has+been+determined+competent+to+stand+trial+is+not+necessarily+competent+to+represent+himself+at+trial+and+can+therefore+be+prevented+from+doing+so+by+the+State.++Indiana+v.+Edwards%2C+128+S.+Ct.+2379+)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2009#http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=142665&sr=AUTHOR(Manning)%2BAND%2BTITLE(The+United+States+Constitution+Allows+a+State+to+Limit+the+Right+of+a+Criminal+Defendant+to+Represent+Himself+at+Trial+on+the+Ground+of+a+Lack+of+Mental+Competence%3A+Indiana+v.+Edwards++CONSTITUTIONAL+LAW+--+CRIMINAL+LAW+--+MENTAL+COMPETENCE+--+RIGHT+OF+SELF-REPRESENTATION+--+The+United+States+Supreme+Court+held+that+a+criminal+defendant+who+has+been+determined+competent+to+stand+trial+is+not+necessarily+competent+to+represent+himself+at+trial+and+can+therefore+be+prevented+from+doing+so+by+the+State.++Indiana+v.+Edwards%2C+128+S.+Ct.+2379+)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2009#http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=142665&sr=AUTHOR(Manning)%2BAND%2BTITLE(The+United+States+Constitution+Allows+a+State+to+Limit+the+Right+of+a+Criminal+Defendant+to+Represent+Himself+at+Trial+on+the+Ground+of+a+Lack+of+Mental+Competence%3A+Indiana+v.+Edwards++CONSTITUTIONAL+LAW+--+CRIMINAL+LAW+--+MENTAL+COMPETENCE+--+RIGHT+OF+SELF-REPRESENTATION+--+The+United+States+Supreme+Court+held+that+a+criminal+defendant+who+has+been+determined+competent+to+stand+trial+is+not+necessarily+competent+to+represent+himself+at+trial+and+can+therefore+be+prevented+from+doing+so+by+the+State.++Indiana+v.+Edwards%2C+128+S.+Ct.+2379+)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2009#http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=142665&sr=AUTHOR(Manning)%2BAND%2BTITLE(The+United+States+Constitution+Allows+a+State+to+Limit+the+Right+of+a+Criminal+Defendant+to+Represent+Himself+at+Trial+on+the+Ground+of+a+Lack+of+Mental+Competence%3A+Indiana+v.+Edwards++CONSTITUTIONAL+LAW+--+CRIMINAL+LAW+--+MENTAL+COMPETENCE+--+RIGHT+OF+SELF-REPRESENTATION+--+The+United+States+Supreme+Court+held+that+a+criminal+defendant+who+has+been+determined+competent+to+stand+trial+is+not+necessarily+competent+to+represent+himself+at+trial+and+can+therefore+be+prevented+from+doing+so+by+the+State.++Indiana+v.+Edwards%2C+128+S.+Ct.+2379+)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2009#http://wiki.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/academic/index.php?title=Academichttp://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=142665&sr=AUTHOR(Manning)%2BAND%2BTITLE(The+United+States+Constitution+Allows+a+State+to+Limit+the+Right+of+a+Criminal+Defendant+to+Represent+Himself+at+Trial+on+the+Ground+of+a+Lack+of+Mental+Competence%3A+Indiana+v.+Edwards++CONSTITUTIONAL+LAW+--+CRIMINAL+LAW+--+MENTAL+COMPETENCE+--+RIGHT+OF+SELF-REPRESENTATION+--+The+United+States+Supreme+Court+held+that+a+criminal+defendant+who+has+been+determined+competent+to+stand+trial+is+not+necessarily+competent+to+represent+himself+at+trial+and+can+therefore+be+prevented+from+doing+so+by+the+State.++Indiana+v.+Edwards%2C+128+S.+Ct.+2379+)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2009#http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/sourceBrowser.asphttp://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/sourceBrowser.asp?tab=findhttps://www-lexisnexis-com.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/terms/general.aspx