View Documents by Category:
- 8th Amendment 18
- ADA 19
- Armed Forces Court 1
- Behavioral Health 3
- CST 24
- Child Custody 11
- Civil Action 52
- Civil Commitment 28
- Civil Suit 3
- Competence 42
- Conditions of Confinement 8
- Confidentiality 9
- Criminal Defense 1
- DOJ 1
- Death Penalty 45
- Defense Counsel 25
- Discrimination 3
- Double Jeopardy 1
- Due Process 2
- Duty of Care 12
- Education 1
- Evaluation 3
- Excessive Force 12
- Firearms 5
- Fourth Circuit 18
- Guilty Plea 1
- HIPAA 6
- Immunity 29
- Ineffective Assistance 24
- Inmates 23
- Inpatient 13
- Insurance 17
- Intellectual Disability 34
- Interrogation 1
- Involuntary Commitment 26
- Involuntary Medication 32
- Jails and Prisons 27
- Jury Instructions 9
- Juveniles 30
- Law Enforcement 31
- Legislation 8
- Liability/Duty of Care 1
- MOT 1
- Medical Malpractice 1
- Mental Health 42
- Mental Health Experts 29
- Mental Health Providers 73
- Mental Health Treatment 1
- Mental Illness 3
- Military Court 1
Case Law
An inventory of Case Law Developments as recorded in issues of Developments in Mental Health Law.
Search for cases by key words:
Intellectual disability; execution
Moore v. Texas, 137 S.Ct. 1039 (2017)
U.S. Supreme Court reverses the ruling of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that defendant convicted of a capital crime was not intellectually disabled. The Supreme Court found that the state court deviated from the consensus of the medical community and relied on lay stereotypes of intellectual disability rather than accepted clinical standards.
Found in DMHL Volume 36, Issue 2
Involuntary Commitment and Loss of Right to Possess Firearms
In re Vencil Appeal of Pa. State Police, 152 A.3d 235 (Pa. 2017)
Pennsylvania Supreme Court interprets Pennsylvania statute governing challenges to loss of right to possess firearms following involuntary civil commitment for mental health treatment, holding that when reviewing a physician’s decision to involuntarily commit an individual, a court must find that the physician’s decision was supported by a preponderance of the evidence available to the physician when the decision was made.
Found in DMHL Volume 36, Issue 1
Ineffective Assistance, Rights Waiver
Iannarelli v. Young, 904 N.W.2d 82 (S.D. 2017)
The Supreme Court of South Dakota upheld a sentence because the defendant waived his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and he did not receive ineffective counsel either by failure to warn the defendant of his Fifth Amendment right prior to a psychological evaluation or by failure to request a hearing to determine if institutionalization may be appropriate.