| It is hypothesized that attorneys with more experience and attorneys with a more favorable opinion of the use of competency to stand trial evaluations will adopt a more paternalistic approach in the application of competency evaluation. The criteria by which these attorneys decide to have certain defendants evaluated for their competency to stand trial is focused more on the client's best interest, such as mental welfare, rather than strictly case outcome, or the least restrictive measures. This study, following a one-shot design, surveys criminal defense attorneys in Dallas County, Texas. Attorneys are probed as to which decisional approaches, paternalism or pure-advocacy, they follow. The study found that attorneys with a more favorable opinion of competency evaluations will express a greater degree of paternalism and pure-advocacy. |
