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