Abstract
Adjudicative competence evaluations are commonly requested for adult criminal defendants, and are becoming increasingly common among juvenile defendants as well. However, we do not have an understanding of what information judges seek in these evaluations. In this study, juvenile and criminal court judges from seven states (N = 166) were surveyed. Results indicated that judges: (1) consider clinicians' ultimate opinion to be an essential component of reports, and more important than descriptive information and rationales for opinions; (2) view forensic and psychological testing as valuable; (3) look for similar but not identical characteristics in juvenile and adult competence evaluations; and (4) consider opinions about maturity to be an important component of competence evaluations in juvenile court.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
