For Jackson v.Indiana, describe the courts reasoning about 1) what was not sufficient about the examination of the defendant by the lower court, 2) what the standard should be (the standard determined in Jackson), and 3) under which constitutional amendent did the higher court base its decision.

How does theRiggens v. Nevadadecision about "drug induced competency" relate toeach of the two prongs (evaluation foci) of theDusky v. USdecision in terms of a) understanding and b) ability to participate?

The right to competency has constitutional status in the U.S. and originally under the 14th amendment. What is the overall purpose of competency, that is why are there competency standards in the law?

Please describe two things that you feel you have learned in the first half of the semester and how each of the two things you have highlightedhas affected your thinkingabout psychology and or law.