Term
how many criminal cases end in a guilty plea/plea baragin |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| defendant admits guilt, and gives relevant information so the prosecution can secure a win and reduce the defendant's charges and reccomend a reduced sentence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| prosecutor drops some charges for a guilty plea |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| prosecutor reccomends a lesser sentence for a guilty plea |
|
|
Term
| Benefit of Plea Baragining for a Defendant |
|
Definition
| More likely to have a reduced sentence/charges b/c of exchnage of information (sentencing is harsher during trial), greater procedural justice (increase defendant satisfaction), closure for the defendant |
|
|
Term
| Cost of Plea Bargaining to Defendants |
|
Definition
| surrender 6th ammendment rights, incompetent people pleading guilty, bias in plea barganing: private v. public lawyers, prosecution has much more power --> use framing effect to push defense |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| way decisions are presented (framed), as either losses or gains, can have an impact on what the person chooses b/c ppl are more willing to take chances when the alternatives are presented in terms of gains, than in losses |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| holding an overly optimistic view of the liklihood of a favorable outcome in take legal action, defendants believe they have a good chance at winning at trial leading them to reject reasonable plea offers |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| dispute resolution through barganing between parties, no third party, could be people negotiating or lawyers representing the people |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a third party helps resolve disputes, but doesn't resolve it FOR the people |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
third party hears evidence and decides the outcome
(less formal rules of evidence and trial process, less resources used, is cheaper than going to trial) |
|
|
Term
| Why laywers/judges prefer to settle outside of trial |
|
Definition
| trials are expensive, judges can mandate ADR, goes from a conflict to a problem to be solved, more satisfaction |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| min/max willinf to pay/take, affects barganing zone b/c more cooperative stance might increase the bargaining zone |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| tendency to interpret into or make decisions in ways that are consistent with one's own interests, rather than in an objective fashion |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| cognitive bias that describes the common human tendency for ppl to rely too much on, or "anchor" their decisions on a suggested piece of information (dollar value in the context of damafe awards) |
|
|
Term
Anchoring and
Adjustment Bias |
|
Definition
| individuals are strongly influenced or "anchored" to an initial starting value and when in later decisions they refuse to adjust their judgments from this starting point |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
go in with a positive attitude more likely to make headway than if you go in with a negative attitude
positive feelings breed positive negotiations |
|
|
Term
| Emery et al. Custody Study |
|
Definition
| randomly assigned families in custody disputes to either court or mediation. 12 years later families that did ADR were more satisfied with the outcome, evidence shows that children of ADR more likely to have both parents involved in life |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| developed to rehabilitate/monitor individuals rather than incarcerate them |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
approach to the law emphasizing favorable mental health impact or otherwise "therapudic" impact of the legal system on its participants
(problem-solving courts are designed to help and treat defendants, making this legal system more effective) |
|
|
Term
| How are drug courts different than normal courts? |
|
Definition
| they address the abuse of drugs and criminal activity related to drugs, link drug addicts with treatment programs and supervison: is offenders successfully complete the programs charges/sentence may be dropped/reduced |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| answering questions about an individual involved in the legal system |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| focuses on the use of psychological knowledge to answer questions about individuals involved in the legal system, not just about mental illness (what is safest in child abuse/neglect cases) |
|
|
Term
| Forensic Psychologists are Expert Witnesses |
|
Definition
a qualified expert can testify about a topic if the testimony is relevant to an issue in the dispure and if the usefulness of the testimony outweighs its potential prejudicial impact
(scientific, technical, help trier of fact understand evidence/determine a fact, grounded in scientific method and theory) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
legal capacities necessary for a defendant to stand trial/plead guillty
(Godimez V. Moran 1993 competency to plead guilty is the same as the competency to stand trial) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| judge decides competence, but prosecution, defense, and judge can raise the issue of competence |
|
|
Term
| How often do defense attorneys question their client's competence? |
|
Definition
| In 15% of felony cases, and in 30% of misdemeanor cases |
|
|
Term
| Dusky Standard for adjudicative competence |
|
Definition
-consult with laywer with a rational degree of understanding-rational/factual understanding of proceedings against them
-appreciate consequences of the criminal act
-understand charges and every step of the legal process, and understand all their rights |
|
|
Term
| Competent to Plead Guilty |
|
Definition
| ability for the defendant to understand the possible consequences of pleading guilty instead of going to trial, and making a rational choice to do so |
|
|
Term
| Percent of Defendants Found Competent |
|
Definition
| normally 70%, but in vigorous competence exams 90% |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| deliberate faking/exaggerating of physical/ psychological symptoms to gain an advantage, detected by the commonly exaggerated symptoms (faking on a scale, claiming to have never lied before) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| can stipulate incompetence, or agree w/o further examination that a person is incompetent (no hearing or examination needed) |
|
|
Term
| Burden of Proof in Competence Cases |
|
Definition
the defense must prove incompetence through burden of proof
preponderance of evidence that the defendant is more than not likely to be incompetent |
|
|
Term
| What happens if a defendant is found competent/incompetent to stand trial? |
|
Definition
competent: case proceedes normally
incompetent: case dismissed w/ treatment if minor charge, but if it's a serious charge the defendant will be treated to restore competence and then tried |
|
|
Term
| How long can a defendant be hospitalized to restore competence? |
|
Definition
| for as long as their sentence would have been if they were charged guilty, can only be held for a reaosnable period of time to determine if there's a "substantial probability" that the defendant will attain competence in the "forseeable future" |
|
|
Term
| What happens if a defendant's competence is unable to be restored? |
|
Definition
| either released to family, or involuntarily committed |
|
|
Term
| Competence to be Sentenced |
|
Definition
| defendant must understand the punishment and why it is being enacted, as well as competent to address the court at sentencing |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| can't execute an individual, who due to mental illness, does not understand why they are being executed |
|
|
Term
| What is an insanity plea? |
|
Definition
| a legal term only, considers mental abnormality in assessing criminal culpability, those acquitted of charges b/c found not guilty by reason of mental defect or deficiency have to spend time in treatment. It's a complete defense: exonerates the defendant as if the crime were never committed, and the purpose of the plea is to defferentiate between defendants who do a crime but don't deserve punishment |
|
|
Term
Parts of the insanity defense:
Actuas Rea
Mens Rea |
|
Definition
Actuas Rea: guilty act
Mens Rea: guilty mind
(insanity is about a lack of Mens Rea) |
|
|
Term
Free Will and
Insanity Defense |
|
Definition
| our legal system is based upon the belief of free will, if free will is abscent the basis for charging an individual is null and void, free will requires an understanding that is not impaired by mental illness |
|
|
Term
| How often is the insanity defense employed and employed successfully? |
|
Definition
plea raised in .9% of cases
of these cases only 27% result in a true NGRI outcome |
|
|
Term
| What happens after a defendant is found NGRI? |
|
Definition
| criminal case is over, most cases the individual is committed to a mental facility |
|
|
Term
| Why would someone be involuntatily committed? |
|
Definition
| -due to mental illness person is a danger to themselves/others, can't take care of themselves |
|
|
Term
| M'Naughten Case and Insanity Standards |
|
Definition
1843, man shot and killed a private secretary of the British prime minister b/c he had paranoid delusions
1) did not know what he was doing --> not guilty b/c mentally ill
1) did not know what he did was wrong
only problem w/ standards is that depression is a mental illness but that doesn't make ppl kill |
|
|
Term
| Brawner/Amerian Law Institute (ALI) Insanity Defense Guidelines |
|
Definition
| M'Naughten also had no mention of free will, created a two prong system: cognitive impairment, and volitional impairment (lack of free will). As a result of mental disease/defect the defendant lacks the substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfullness of conduct OR lacks the ability to conform behavior to the requirements of the law |
|
|
Term
| How Brawner/Amerian Law Institute (ALI) Insanity defense guidelines differ from M'Naughten? |
|
Definition
1) ALI incorporates emotional/cognitive determinates of criminal actions
2) does not require defendants to exhibit a total lack of understanding for their crime
3)cognitive/volitional impairments covered, makin defendants' inability to control their actions sufficient reason for a NGRI plea |
|
|
Term
Insanity Defense Reform Act (IDRA)
(post attempted Regan assassination) |
|
Definition
| in federal courts to make NGRI more difficult to use -emilimated volitional (free will) prong 1) expert testimoney on the nature of insanity of the defendant is prohibited, keeps expert witnesses from having excessive influence over the jury's decision 2) burden of proof is now on the defendant to prove insanity, as opposed to the prosecution having to prove sanity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| only difference from guilty sentence is that defendants may start sentences in hospitals or receive treatment in prison, no acquittal like in NGRI cases |
|
|
Term
Dual-Process Model
of Thinking |
|
Definition
| 2 approaches to human info processing: typically one is a motivated, effortful, rational appraoch and one is a quick,intuitive with no motivation or effort in thinking |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| hypothesis: when the strength of evidence against a defendant is weak, jurors are free to rely on nonlegal info to inform decisons (not rational) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| nature of the evidence regarding guilt in a legal proceedin, one of the most imortant parts in a jurors' verdict: 70% increase in conviction rates as evidence against the accused increases |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
not legally relevant influences that cannot serve as evidence in the legal process
(age, gender, race) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an instruction to the jury placing explicit limitations on how certain evidence can be considered, judge may limit the consdieration of a defendant's prior record (actually has the opposite effect, think about forbidden things more --thought suppression) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| psychogical study of how ppl use/understand language, used to help juries understand instructs better: 1) removing abstract terms 2) reorganzing instructs in a more logical manner 3)dumbing down instructions so they can be more easily understood |
|
|
Term
| Should jury instructions be put at the beining or the end of the trial? |
|
Definition
At the end: recency, generally remember them better for the deliberation
At the beginning:primacy, jurors can make a mental framework to decide what is relevant and important as the testimony unfolds |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an option allowing the jury to disregard both the law and the evidence and acquit the defendant if the jury believes they don't deserve to be charged for the crime despite evidence and judicial instructions to do so |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| jurors' initial inclinations influence the way they interpret evidence presented during a trial, see all evidence through that lens |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
notion that ppl create a story/narrative summary of the events in a dispute, how they build the story shows how they made a decision in the case
doesn't account of sway of opinions during deliberation |
|
|
Term
| What have been the key jury reforms since the 1990s? |
|
Definition
letting jurors take notes, summaries of witness testimonies, instructions during the trial
controversial: allowing jurors to pose their own questions (filtered through the judge), and discussing evidence in the midst of a trial |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| similar offenders who cimmit similar crimes receive different sentences |
|
|
Term
| What are the seven goals of punishment? |
|
Definition
| moral outrage, rehabilitation, restitution, general deterrence, specific deterrence, incapication, retribution |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| society's satisfaction at seeing the offender punished |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| create change in the offender in a way that reduces the likelihood of reoffending |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| wrongdoers should compendate the victim for damages/losses/ pay out of pocket expenses |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| punishment of offenders prevents others from also breaking the law |
|
|
Term
| Specific/Individual Deterrence |
|
Definition
| punishment of that offender reduces the liklihood of that person reoffending |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| restricting the offender in a way that reduces the chance they will reoffend (locking them up) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| making the offender suffer the consequences of their actions "just deserts" |
|
|
Term
| Utilitarian Punishment Goals |
|
Definition
| criminal sentences should be designed to hold a useful outcome, like compensation for the vitim, or rehabilitating the offender |
|
|
Term
| Retributive Punishment Goals |
|
Definition
| an offender deserves to be punished and the punishment should correlate to the severity of the crime |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
reoffending after release from punishment
2/3 of offenders will be rearrested in 3 years |
|
|
Term
| Why is restitution not a primary goal in the criminal justice system? |
|
Definition
purpose of a criminal trial is to resolve wrongs to society, not to compenate the victim of the crime
in civil cases pay damages, here pay out of pocket expenses |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| attempts to heal the hars done through dialogue among offenders/harmed persons. purpose is to repair trust, reintegrate offenders into the community, empower the victim |
|
|
Term
| Carlsmith, Darley, Robinson on Deterrance V. Retribution Goals |
|
Definition
| public preference for what punishment is for: participants indiciated sentence severity was sensitive to deservingness, but sentence severity was not sensitive to the amount of deterrance it brought, but when asked which purpose of prision is more important people placed deterrance above retribution |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| offenders are sentenced for a fixed amount of time determined by statues/guidelines |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| judges excersize discretion by imposinga length of time for a given offense (6-20 years) |
|
|
Term
| Mandatory Minimum Sentences |
|
Definition
| minimum # of years in prison regardless of the circumstances revolving around the crime, compromise b/c restricting, but doesn't eliminate discretion. can be unjust b/c doesn't account of extenuating circumstances |
|
|
Term
| What is the biggest determinate of sentence severity? |
|
Definition
severity of the crime
*PHEW* |
|
|
Term
| Gender and Sentence Severity |
|
Definition
| women receive less severe sentences than men, except in violent crimes, and crimes against women result in harsher sentences |
|
|
Term
| Racial Bias in Sentencing |
|
Definition
| 71 studies show African Americans more likely to be given harsher sentences than white defendants of similar crimes (despairty the largest in drug cases) |
|
|
Term
Attitudes Toward
the Death Penalty |
|
Definition
| attitutudes toward the death penalthy are more negative, 61% support, 35% oppose. b/c lower crime rates, more states repealing/finding DP unconstitutional, unlikely ppl speak out about it, being anti-DP doesn't hold the same connotations it once did |
|
|
Term
| Why was the death penalty found unconsitutional in Furman? |
|
Definition
| state statues for DP convictions gave juries "unbridled discretion." unconstitutional b/c it is cruel and unusual, 4 year ban until states revamped jury instructions: now have specific criteria that must be met, considering aggrivating and mititgating factors |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| court found new DP jury instructions constitutional and sentenced a man to death |
|
|
Term
| Aggravating Circumstances |
|
Definition
| can only consider those specified by the court that are deemed relevant/make the crime worse: kill a police officer, get pleasure from the crime, torture, serial/mass murder. Relevant b/c it frames exactly why you would put the person to death |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| can consider any facts surroudning the case, make the defendant less culpable (childhood abuse, young age, lack of criminal record) |
|
|
Term
| Why limit aggrivating but not mitigating circumstances in deliberation? |
|
Definition
| prevents juries from considering aggravating circumstances that shouldn't be, not the same concern with mitigating b/c worse that happens is they get a life sentence instead of death |
|
|
Term
| Is the death penalty a weak deterrent of homocide? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
proposition that captial punishment actually increases the crime rate by sending message that it is acceptable to kill people if they wrong us
no empirical support |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| members of a jury who don't have any biases that would render them incapable of using the death penalty, happens during initial voire dire |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
criminal trials happen in 2 phases
1) guilt/innocence
2) sentencing (jury decides in DP cases) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| can exclude individuals who's attitudes toward DP would prevent their duties as a juror |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| exclude Automatic Death Penalty jurors (if defendant is guilty, they jump to DP) |
|
|
Term
| How does being death qualified affect jury behavior? |
|
Definition
| exclude extremes, jury is more likely to convict in general: conviction prone jury |
|
|
Term
| What shows that jurors don't understand what mitigating factors are? |
|
Definition
| the definition of mitigating is often lost in legal language, use childhood abuse as an aggravating factor instead of mitigating, or igore some evidence completely b/c they don't know how to cateogrize it, and when they don't understand they rely on things like the heinousness of the crime, sympathy, or racial stereotypes |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| understanding of legal concepts |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ability to know what to do to reach a proper sentencing decision |
|
|
Term
Modified language helps jurors understand instructions:
(Weiner et al.) |
|
Definition
1) simplified language
2) presenting the instructions in a flow chart, so jurors can see the progress of the decisions they need to make
3) letting jurors practice a mock deliberation before the real trial
4) offering corrections to common misconceptions jurors have about mitigating/aggravating factors |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| under 18, mentally ill who do not understand their crimes/why they're being executed, developmentally diabled people |
|
|
