Competence in criminal justice
Institution affiliation
Student’s name
Date
Quiz 1
Introduction
Competence in criminal justice proceeding is the defendant’s capacity to meaningfully participate and make decisions during the criminal justice process. Competence is important at any stage of the criminal justice process. Therefore, competence plays a role from the defendant’s first word to the arresting officer, to verdict, to sentencing (Linden, M. A., 2020). Competence evaluation is a mental health assessment ordered by the court to determine how much defendants understand their allied offenses and charges. Also, it determines whether the defendants understand court proceedings and assists a lawyer in their defense.
Witnesses can come forward to testify in a court of law either voluntarily, or they can be forced through subpoenas. Witnesses are competent if they are eligible to testify, assuming they have relevant and admissible evidence to offer. Their competence depends on their capacity to observe, remember, communicate a narrative, and know the obligation of speaking truthfully (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). In civil cases, witness competence is evaluated for the claim under federal law. Mental states of witnesses can render them incapable of understanding and narrating events they are attempting to testify about.
Witnesses with an inability to consistently narrate events in logical and chronological order the judge can render them incompetent. It is relevant because the witnesses cannot give a full account of the events. If eyewitnesses are on medication and cannot remember events they are trying to testify, they are deemed incompetent. The competence evaluation of these witnesses is guaranteed because they cannot be relied on to testify on criminal cases (Bownman 2014). For instance, in a case held in 1918, a witness was held competent by the appeal court. The witness was held incompetent because he testified according to his religious belief.
Conclusion
In conclusion, competence evaluation can be requested whenever questions of the defendant’s or witnesses’ mental states. A psychiatrist with specialized training typically conducts the evaluation. During the evaluation, all medical and criminal records are reviewed. Competence evaluation is important because if the defendant does not understand the charges, the court cannot proceed with the case.
Quiz 2
The journal evaluates methods used in the evaluation of a witness’s competency and its importance. The competence of witnesses is based on the capacity to remember, narrate, and understand the obligation to speak truthfully (Bowman, 2014). Therefore, witnesses’ mental state can render them incapable of understanding and narrating events on what they are testifying about. Also, if eyewitnesses are under medication or cannot remember the events, they are deemed incompetent.
According to Brandy’s rule, exculpatory evidence essential to verify innocence, and proof must be shared with the defense side. Brandy rule is violated when evidence that the prosecution has not turned over misses (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). Therefore, this can be used to dismiss all charges in a criminal case if proven that the courts or law enforcement acted in bad faith. Confrontation clause and hearsay exception under Rule 803 of the Rules of Evidence can be applied when the person is unavailable for hearsay purposes. Privileged testimonies can also be an exception for hearsay testimony.
Conclusion
In conclusion, entering a dwelling to search for evidence, a court-ordered written document known as a search warrant recurs (Klubok, 2015). There are different types of search warrants according to the occasion. In case there are some suspicions that evidence might be destroyed, a night-time warrant is required. Other types or search warrant include; no-knock warrant, anticipatory warrant, sneak-and-peek entry warrant, an administrative search warrant.
Reference
Linden, M. A., O’Rourke, C., & Lohan, M. (2020). Traumatic brain injury competence in criminal cases. 42(17), 2422-2429.
Bowman, M. N. (2014). Full disclosure: Cognitive science, informants, and search warrant scrutiny. Akron
Gardner, T. J., & Anderson, T. M. (2016). Criminal evidence: Principles and cases (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.