ABSTRACT
Legal competence is a critically important cornerstone of the U.S. legal system, a system rooted in the principle of equal justice for all, and which prides itself on providing numerous procedural safeguards to maintain fairness. Legal competence is a core component of the “Due Process” provisions that are constitutionally protected by the Fih and Fourteenth Amendments (LII/Legal Information Institute 2014a,b). In Dusky v. US, the U.S. Supreme Court set forth the constitutionally required test for competence to stand trial (Baerger et al. 2003). Being competent to stand trial as dened by the Dusky standard requires that the defendant has (1) sucient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and (2) a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him or her (Baerger et al. 2003). States vary in terms of including mental illness or developmental disability (or similarly worded predicates of competency) in their statutory denitions of competency to stand trial. In California, the Dusky standard is interpreted through Penal Code Section 1367, with incompetency to stand trial statutorily dened as being “a result of a mental disorder or developmental disability.” In that sense, mental illness or developmental disability is considered necessary but not sucient to be found incompetent to stand trial (IST). However, this statute does not mention the unique factors that arise in applying the competency issue to a juvenile population, namely, the impact of developmental maturity on competency to stand trial (CST).
