Suppr超能文献

Linguistic diversity in deaf defendants and due process rights.

作者信息

Miller K R, Vernon M

机构信息

e-mail:

出版信息

J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2001 Summer;6(3):226-34. doi: 10.1093/deafed/6.3.226.

Abstract

Historically, ensuring the due process rights of deaf defendants has been a problematic issue in the criminal justice system (McAlister, 1994; Smith, 1994; Vernon & Coley, 1978; Vernon & Greenburg, 1996; Vernon & Miller, in press; Vernon & Raifman, 1997; Whalen, 1981; Wood, 1984). Inadequate communication can radically affect a deaf defendant's interactions in the courtroom. Pursuant to the concepts of fairness enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and the specific statutory language contained in federal and state laws, the courts must provide equal access for deaf defendants (Berko, 1992; Gallie & Smith, 2000; McCoy, 1992; Simon, 1994; Vernon & Raifman, 1997). It is the responsibility of the court to ensure that the appropriate accommodation is provided in the language most readily understood by the defendant.When adjudicating a deaf criminal defendant, courts must make certain that the defendant has equal access to various due process activities, such as assisting counsel in the development of a defense, deciding whether to testify, deciding which plea to enter, understanding the charges, understanding one's position as defendant, and comprehending the role of the defense and prosecuting attorneys, and judge (Berko, 1994; King, 1990; Simon, 1994; Smith, 1994; Vernon & Coley, 1978; Vernon & Miller, in press; Vernon, Raifman, & Greenberg, 1996).However, complex linguistic issues that impinge on adjudicative competence are present in some deaf defendants (Vernon & Miller, in press; Vernon & Raifman, 1997). Adjudicative competence refers to an individual's ability to adequately comprehend and participate in legal proceedings and due process activities. When diverse language use is an issue, a deaf defendant's ability to participate in proceedings can be established by the court using the modern test of adjudicative competence (Dusky v. U.S., 1960). This test examines a defendant's state of mind at the time of trial rather than at the time of the offense in terms of these factors: a defendant's capacity to participate, reasonable understanding of the proceedings, and level of cognitive functioning, irrespective of any mental disorder. This article will outline linguistic barriers to due process for deaf defendants.

摘要

相似文献

1
Linguistic diversity in deaf defendants and due process rights.
J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2001 Summer;6(3):226-34. doi: 10.1093/deafed/6.3.226.
3
Adjudicative competence: evidence that impairment in "rational understanding" is taxonic.
Psychol Assess. 2010 Sep;22(3):716-22. doi: 10.1037/a0020131.
6
Adjudicative Competence in the Context of a Defendant's Absence from Trial after a Suicide Attempt.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2023 Dec 8;51(4):558-565. doi: 10.29158/JAAPL.230093-23.
9
Linguistic diversity in a deaf prison population: implications for due process.
J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2004 Winter;9(1):112-9. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enh007.
10
A confusion of tongues: competence, insanity, psychiatry, and the law.
Psychiatr Serv. 1999 Jun;50(6):767-73. doi: 10.1176/ps.50.6.767.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验