Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Drope Vs. Missouri

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Feb 19, 1975

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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

53 entries 7 linked 46 unlinked
Show
  1. Norris Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Apr 01, 1935
  2. Hawk Vs. Olson US Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1945
  3. Pate Vs. Robinson US Supreme Court · Mar 07, 1966
  4. Jackson Vs. Indiana US Supreme Court · Jun 07, 1972
  5. Watts Vs. Indiana US Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1949
  6. Culombe Vs. Connecticut US Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1961
  7. Peyton Vs. Rowe US Supreme Court · May 20, 1968
  8. U.S. 162 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Drope v. Missouri
    Search
  9. U.S. 162 (1975) Drope v. Missouri
    Search
  10. comported with the requirements Page 420 U. S. 170 of Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  11. U. S. 375 (1966), and that the test of incompetence to stand trial was that stated in Dusky v. United
    Search
  12. the court held that Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  13. See Youtsey v. United
    Search
  14. Foote, A Comment on Pre-Trial Commitment of Criminal Defendants, 108 U.Pa.L.Rev. 832, 834 (1960). See Thomas v. Cunningham
    Search
  15. Dusky v. United
    Search
  16. States, 362 U.S. at 362 U. S. 402 . In Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  17. was the conclusion that the statutory procedure, if followed, was constitutionally adequate. See, e.g., United States v. Knohl
    Search
  18. Evans v. LaVallee
    Search
  19. U.S. at 383 U. S. 385 . See United States v. Marshall
    Search
  20. the respective burdens of the individual and the State and to delimit the scope of state appellate review. Cf. Hawk v. Olson
    Search
  21. Conner v. Wingo
    Search
  22. Greenwood v. United
    Search
  23. to more than one legal issue, each governed by distinct rules reflecting quite different policies. See Jackson v. Indiana
    Search
  24. be resolved. While we have expressed doubt that the right to further inquiry upon the question can be waived, see Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  25. Note, 81 Harv.L.Rev. at 469, we concluded in Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  26. Moore v. United
    Search
  27. of his competence to stand trial to require further inquiry on the question. The import of our decision in Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  28. to an act which suggests a rather substantial degree of mental instability contemporaneous with the trial, see Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  29. such a result might have been avoided by prompt psychiatric examination before trial, when it was sought by petitioner. v. Our
    Search
  30. conduct the remainder of his trial on a capital offense in his enforced absence from a self-inflicted wound. See Diaz v. United
    Search
  31. it clear that there was an insufficient inquiry to afford a basis for deciding the issue of waiver. Cf. Westbrook v. Arizona
    Search
  32. United States v. Silva
    Search
  33. Hansford v. United
    Search
  34. the inherent difficulties of such a nunc pro tunc determination under the most favorable circumstances, see Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  35. U.S. at 362 U. S. 403 , we cannot conclude that such a procedure would be adequate here. Cf. Conner v. Wingo
    Search
  36. U. S. 49 , 338 U. S. 51 (1949) (opinion of Frankfurter, J.). See also Culombe v. Connecticut
    Search
  37. without question a lawyer's representations concerning the competence of his client, see United States ex rel. Rizzi v. Follette
    Search
  38. of the issue of competence to stand trial at an early date best serves both the interests of fairness, see Peyton v. Rowe
    Search
  39. petitioner's wife could not be compelled to testify against him. See State v. Dunbar
    Search
  40. U.S. Supreme Court Drope v. Missouri
    Search
  41. of Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  42. See Thomas v. Cunningham
    Search
  43. In Pate v. Robinson
    Search
  44. United States v. Knohl
    Search
  45. Evans v. LaVallee
    Search
  46. See United States v. Marshall
    Search
  47. Cf. Hawk v. Olson
    Search
  48. See Jackson v. Indiana
    Search
  49. See Diaz v. United
    Search
  50. Cf. Westbrook v. Arizona
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial