Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Dusky Vs. United States

Dusky vs United States

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Apr-18-1960
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/99917

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
362 U.S. 402
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dusky

Respondent

United States

Excerpt

.....motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. upon consideration of the entire record, we agree with the solicitor general that "the record in this case does not sufficiently support the findings of competency to stand trial," for, to support those findings under 18 u.s.c. § 4244, the district judge "would need more information than this record presents." we also agree with the suggestion of the solicitor general that it is not enough for the district judge to find that "the defendant [is] oriented to time and place and [has] some recollection of events," but that the "test must be whether he has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding -- and whether he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him. " page 362 u. s. 403 in view of the doubts and ambiguities regarding the legal significance of the psychiatric testimony in this case and the resulting difficulties of retrospectively determining the petitioner's competency as of more than a year ago, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals affirming the judgment of conviction, and remand the case to the district court for a new hearing to ascertain petitioner's present competency to stand trial, and for a new trial if petitioner is found competent. it is so ordered.

Full Judgment

Dusky v. United States - 362 U.S. 402 (1960)
U.S. Supreme Court Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960)

Dusky v. United States

No. 504, Misc.

Decided April 18, 1960

362 U.S. 402

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

SYLLABUS

Certiorari granted.

Since the record in this case does not sufficiently support the findings of petitioner's competency to stand trial, the judgment affirming his conviction is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court for a hearing to determine his present competency to stand trial, and for a new trial if he is found competent. Pp. 362 U. S. 402 -403.

271 F.2d 385 reversed.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. Upon consideration of the entire record, we agree with the Solicitor General that "the record in this case does not sufficiently support the findings of competency to stand trial," for, to support those findings under 18 U.S.C. § 4244, the district judge "would need more information than this record presents." We also agree with the suggestion of the Solicitor General that it is not enough for the district judge to find that "the defendant [is] oriented to time and place and [has] some recollection of events," but that the

"test must be whether he has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding -- and whether he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him. "

Page 362 U. S. 403

In view of the doubts and ambiguities regarding the legal significance of the psychiatric testimony in this case and the resulting difficulties of retrospectively determining the petitioner's competency as of more than a year ago, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals affirming the judgment of conviction, and remand the case to the District Court for a new hearing to ascertain petitioner's present competency to stand trial, and for a new trial if petitioner is found competent.

It is so ordered.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial