This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by WEISS, M. J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Legal Evaluation of Criminal Competency Standards

Competency to Stand Trial, Competency to Plead Guilty, and Competency to Waive Counsel

Point Park College

A criminal defendant may not be tried unless competent and may not plead guilty or waive the right to counsel unless the waiver is voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. A competency inquiry centers on a defendant's rational and factual understanding of the charges and their consequences and present ability to assist counsel. Competency is not static, changing according to situation and function. In its 1993 ruling, Godinez v. Moran, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the standard for competency to waive counsel and plead guilty is no higher than competency to stand trial, resulting in a relaxed focus for competency determinations.

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 13, No. 3, 213-223 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/1043986297013003002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?