AAFP: Not So Uncommon Topics in Competency Evaluations
AAFP: Presented by Candyce Shields, PhD, ABPP
This on-demand professional training program on Not So Uncommon Topics in Competency Evaluations is presented by Candyce Shields, PhD, ABPP in partnership with the American Board of Forensic Psychology.
This program examines topics that arise less commonly, but that are no less influential in the assessment of competency to stand trial. Topics include: developing informed opinions about the likelihood/probability of restoration to competence; amnesia for the offense in evaluations of competence to stand trial; imposition of a viable insanity defense over a defendant’s objection; and competence to waive the right to counsel (proceed pro se). Relevant case law and literature are reviewed. General and specific conceptual considerations in performing evaluations that involve the topic areas are discussed.
Upon completion of this program you will be able to:
Describe factors relevant to developing informed opinions regarding the likelihood/probability of restoration to competence
Describe relevant case law and factors relevant to developing informed opinions where amnesia for the alleged offense(s) is at issue in evaluations of competence to stand trial
Describe relevant case law and literature regarding the imposition of an insanity defense on defendants
Describe relevant case law and factors relevant to developing informed opinions when evaluating specific competencies to waive counsel
Review Before Proceeding
Lesson Video
Faretta v. California (1975)
Frendak v. United States (1979)
Godinez v. Moran, (1993)
Indiana v. Edwards, (2008)
North Carolina v. Alford, (1970)
US v. Marble, (1991)
Whalem v. US, (1965)
References
Lesson Quiz
Instructions
Evaluation
American Academy of Forensic Psychology
Custom training options for groups of 5 to 500+