Jurisdiction to stand trial is a standard that must be met, and if not, proceedings are terminated. Competency assessments are required if a question arises about a defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings. Having a mental illness or intellectual disability does not necessarily mean someone cannot stand trial. The ability to stand trial is different from an insanity defense.
Standing trial is a standard that must be met if someone is to go to trial. If someone has jurisdiction to sue, it means they understand the purpose and nature of the proceedings and can assist the defense. If someone does not meet this standard, the proceedings are terminated. In the United States, jurisdiction to stand trial has been established as an aspect of due process, and many other nations also have similar protections in place.
If at any point during the criminal proceeding a question arises about the defendant’s competence to stand trial, a competence assessment must be completed. A common cause for questioning someone’s competence is mental illness which could make it difficult to understand the proceedings or which would hinder the preparation of the defense. People with intellectual disabilities can also be considered unable to stand trial.
During the competency assessment, a mental health professional meets with the defendant. The assessment aims to verify whether or not the defendant meets a standard of rationality and is able to understand why a proceeding is taking place, how it will be conducted and what the potential consequences of the proceedings could be. Competency hearings may also be requested before someone waives legal rights, to confirm that the individual understands these rights and what happens when they are waived and when someone wishes to plead guilty.
Having an intellectual disability or mental illness does not necessarily mean that someone’s ability to stand trial will be called into question or that someone cannot be tried. Only an evaluation can determine this. However, some courts have been criticized for trying people who appear to lack an understanding of the proceedings by people who have argued that the jurisdiction hearing was not large enough or was not conducted properly. Concerns have also been raised from another angle by people concerned that competency hearings could be used as a delay or stalemate tactic by the defense.
The ability to stand trial is sometimes compared to an insanity defense, but the two are different concepts. An insanity defense is used in a trial by someone who has been found competent to stand trial. In this defence, it is argued that at the time the offense was committed, the defendant was not of sound mind and need not be guilty by reason of insanity because the defendant did not realize the repercussions of his actions. In these cases, the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the trial allows him to consult a lawyer, understand the charges and the proceedings, and participate in the trial.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
