Clayton v. Gibson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that \'routine booking questions do not constitute interrogation because they do not normally elicit incriminating responses'\
• noting that a cumulative error argument “does not merit review given the lack of any discernible constitutional error”
• emphasizing that prior medical opinions regarding petitioner's competency are \perhaps most important\
• emphasizing that prior medical opinions regarding petitioner’s competency are “perhaps most important”
• noting that factors relevant to a competency determination include “defendant’s demeanor at trial, any evidence of irrational behavior by defendant, and perhaps most important, any prior medical opinions regarding competency.”
• finding no doubt as to petitioner's competency at the time of trial where counsel declined to express \serious\ concerns about his client

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).