相似文献
1
2
Psychotropic medication in the criminal trial process: the constitutional and therapeutic implications of Riggins v. Nevada.
N Y Law Sch J Hum Rights. 1993;10(Part 3):637-709.
3
Trial rights and psychotropic drugs: the case against administering involuntary medications to a defendant during trial.
Vanderbilt Law Rev. 2002;55(1):165-218.
4
Forcible medication and personal autonomy: the case of Charles Thomas Sell.
Boston Univ Law Rev. 2004 Feb;84(1):275-99.
5
Right of a defendant to refuse antipsychotic medication during a criminal trial.
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1993 Sep;50(4):1937-9.
6
Riggins v. Nevada: towards a unified standard for a prisoner's right to refuse medication?
Law Psychol Rev. 1993 Spring;17:41-83.
7
The judicial side effects of involuntary medication as it relates to a criminal defendant's right to a fair trial: Riggins v. Nevada.
Thurgood Marshall Law Rev. 1994 Spring;19(2):355-77.
8
Forced medication of defendants to achieve trial competency: an update on the law after Sell.
Georget J Leg Ethics. 2004 Summer;17(4):813-26.
9
Seeking an answer: questioning the validity of forcible medication to ensure mental competency of those condemned to die.
McGeorge Law Rev. 2000 Fall;32(1):317-40.
10
Forcible medication for courtroom competence--the case of Charles Sell.
N Engl J Med. 2004 May 27;350(22):2297-301. doi: 10.1056/NEJMlim033389.
Zotero 插件