Journal article
Attorney Perspectives on Juvenile and Adult Clients' Competence to Plead Guilty
Psychology, public policy, and law, v 24(2)
01 May 2018
Featured in Collection : UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
Abstract
An overwhelming majority of juvenile and criminal cases result in admission or guilty plea. Standards of competence apply at this stage of the proceedings, so the issue can be raised if someone-usually a defense attorney-believes the defendant lacks competence to plead. It is unclear how often defense attorneys question their clients' competence to plead guilty and what factors lead to such decisions. This study surveyed defense attorneys about their experiences raising this issue in juvenile and criminal court and investigated factors that made them raise this issue and made them decide against formally questioning competence, despite suspecting their clients lacked requisite abilities. Most of the 199 responding attorneys reported having raised a competence issue at this stage, with more attorneys indicating they had done so at least once for an adult client than for a juvenile client. However, when asked about the number of times they raised this issue, attorneys reported doing so more frequently for juvenile clients than for adult clients. Client cognitive deficits, inadequate ability to assist counsel, and mental illness were reported to drive decisions to question competency in both courts. Attorneys endorsed choosing not to raise this issue because of concern about the low legal threshold for competence and that consequences would negatively affect their clients. Results of this study suggest a professional quandary for defense attorneys-who receive little guidance in this area-and add weight to the pressing need for meaningful examination of how the plea process works in principle and in practice.
Metrics
Details
- Title
- Attorney Perspectives on Juvenile and Adult Clients' Competence to Plead Guilty
- Creators
- Amanda NeMoyer - Drexel UniversitySharon Kelley - Drexel UniversityHeather Zelle - Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and Public Policy, University of Virginia, VA, USNaomi E. S. Goldstein - Drexel University
- Publication Details
- Psychology, public policy, and law, v 24(2)
- Publisher
- Amer Psychological Assoc
- Number of pages
- 9
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Psychological and Brain Sciences (Psychology)
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:000431998900004
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-85038630690
- Other Identifier
- 991019168546904721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web of Science research areas
- Health Policy & Services
- Law
- Psychology, Multidisciplinary