land mark cases

Topics: United States, Supreme Court of the United States, U.S. state Pages: 5 (681 words) Published: August 10, 2014


Landmark Case Selection
Angela Rosado
Argosy University
June 16, 2014

Essence of the cases
United States vs. Keith Joseph Duhon (2000) - No. 97-60034-00 United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lafayette and Opelousas Division The courts were determining whether Duhon was able to comprehend his actions. Mr. Duhon was hospitalized and underwent psychological testing and was found incompetent to stand trial due to his mental retardation and his inability to learn or truly comprehend. Duhon’s mental ability shows how forensic psychology played a major role in his psychological testing and his ability to understand what he had done was wrong. Durham vs. United States (1954) - No. 11859

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals adopted the Durham Rule for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1954. In the rule, the court stated, “An accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease.” (Court of Appeals, 1954). The Durham Rule today is consider an advancement of a defense of insanity for it replaces unbiased determination in the field of forensic psychology (“A Crime of Insanity, 2012″). Estelle vs. Gamble (1976) –No. 75-929

Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
The inmate brought a civil rights case against the department of corrections for what he stated was cruel and unusual punishment, and that he was subjected to inadequate medical treatment for a back injury and chest pains. The court determined that medical malpractice did show any level of curl and unusual punishment. The inmate must show adequate cause of unusual punishment. Washington vs. Harper (1990) –No. 88-599

Supreme Court of the United States
Harper was administered antipsychotic drugs involuntary for his bipolar disorder. After being administered the drug he filed a suit in state court. “The suit was then rejected by the court claiming the failure to provide a judicial hearing before they involuntary administrated the antipsychotic drug had violated the Fourteenth Amendment.” (Criminal law, 2009). The Supreme Court permits the State to administrate antipsychotic drugs to seriously mental ill prisoners against his or her will, only if they pose a danger to themselves or others. Forensic psychology is a major part of this case, counseling of the inmate to determine his ability to function without the antipsychotic drug.( Criminal law, 2009) Mckune vs. Lile (2002) - No. 00-1187

Supreme Court of the United State
Supreme Court case where the Court determined that the Kansas Sexual Abuse Treatment Program (SATP) that is offered to all inmates convicted of sexual assault is a vital penological purpose, where the SATP does not compelled self- incrimination as it is prohibited in the Fifth Amendment. Kansas vs. Hendricks (1997) - No. - 95-1649

United States Supreme Court
Supreme Court case whereas the courts determined where the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act had violated the due process rights of an individual that was convicted of a sex crime. The Supreme Court ruled that SVPA did not in fact violate the due process rights of double jeopardy nor does it prohibit the ex post facto laws. Forensic psychology played a major role in this case, the psychologist had to determine where or not Hendricks was a danger to society, as he agreed with the psychologist that he had some mental abnormalities.

References
Durham vs. United States. (1954). Unite States Courts of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. Retrieved from: http//: scholar.goggle.com/scholar .case? Case- 1244686235948852364 United States vs Duhon, W.D. La. (2000). United States District Court. W.D. Louisiana Lafayette and Opelousas Division. Retrieved from: http//: Forensicmentalhealthservices.org United State vs. Duhon, W.D. La. (2000). United Sates District Court. W.D. Louisiana Lafayette and Opelousas Division. Retrieved from: http//:...

References: Durham vs. United States. (1954). Unite States Courts of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. Retrieved from: http//: scholar.goggle.com/scholar .case? Case- 1244686235948852364
United States vs Duhon, W.D. La. (2000). United States District Court. W.D. Louisiana Lafayette and Opelousas Division. Retrieved from: http//: Forensicmentalhealthservices.org
United State vs. Duhon, W.D. La. (2000). United Sates District Court. W.D. Louisiana Lafayette and Opelousas Division. Retrieved from: http//: la.findacase.com
Estelle vs. Gamble. (1976). Wright. Lester N. “Health care in prison thirsty years after Estelle vs. Gamble” Retrieved from: http//: Journal of correctional health care 14.1 (2014): 31-35
Washington vs. Harper. (1990). Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved from: http//: Forensicmeantalhealthservices.org
Mckune vs. Lile. (2002). Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved from: http//: law.cornell.edususpect...0-1187
Kansas vs. Hendricks. (1997). United States Supreme Court. Retrieved from: http//:laws.findacase.comus0095-1649.html
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Mark Essay
  • Case Hk Disney Land Essay
  • Land Rover Case Essay
  • Land Rover Case Analysis Essay
  • Essay about Land Rover Case
  • Marks and Spencer Case Study Essay
  • Essay about Land Rover Case Analysis
  • Mark X Case Answers Research Paper

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free