Commentary: No rational reasons for changing competency-to-stand-trial standard

GB Leong

Commentary: No rational reasons for changing competency-to-stand-trial standard

GB Leong
GB Leong

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
September 2004,
32
(3)
246-249;

This is a PDF-only article. The first page of the PDF of this article appears above.

PDF

Previous Next

In this Issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts

Alerts for this Article

User Name *

Password *

Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email *
Email Article

Email This Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.
NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Your Email *

Your Name *

Send To *

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.

You are going to email the following
Commentary: No rational reasons for changing competency-to-stand-trial standard
Message Subject
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Message Body
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.

Your Personal Message

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Citation Tools
Commentary: No rational reasons for changing competency-to-stand-trial standard

GB Leong

GB Leong

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online

Sep 2004,

32

(3)

246-249;

Citation Manager Formats

BibTeX
Bookends
EasyBib
EndNote (tagged)
EndNote 8 (xml)
Medlars
Mendeley
Papers
RefWorks Tagged
Ref Manager
RIS
Zotero
Request Permissions

Share
Share This Article
Commentary: No rational reasons for changing competency-to-stand-trial standard

GB Leong

GB Leong

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online

Sep 2004,

32

(3)

246-249;

Share This Article:
Post
Like 0