Curing the Ake of an Incompetent Expert: A Separate Reviewable Issue
Vol: 29, Issue: 4, Page: 799
1992
- 72Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage72
- Downloads66
- Abstract Views6
Commentary Description
The Supreme Court's mid-1980s decision in Ake v. Oklahoma established the defendant's constitutional right to "competent psychiatric assistance." Although many states had already provided indigent defendants access to psychiatric assistance in their defense, it was not until the Court decided Ake that this access was established as his or her constitutional right. However, whether this due process right to expert assistance was satisfied by the mere appointment of a psychiatrist or whether it included the requirement that the expert perform competently had remained unanswered as of 1992. This Comment attempts to address this issue in the affirmative and additionally develops a standard upon which the issue can be reviewed by the courts.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know