Supreme Court· 6/22/1992

Medina v. California

Citations

505 U.S. 437
112 S. Ct. 2572
120 L. Ed. 2d 353
1992 U.S. LEXIS 3696

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that “defense counsel will often have the best-informed view of the defendant’s ability to participate in his defense”
holding that California could establish a presumption of competence and place the burden of proof on a defendant seeking to prove incompetence
holding that California could establish a presumption of competence and place the burden of proof on a defendant seeking to prove incompetence
holding that the Mathews test “does not provide the appropriate framework for assessing the validity of state procedural rules which ... are part of the criminal process”
holding that due process guarantee is not violated by placing burden on defendant to prove incompetency to stand trial
holding that due process -8- No. 24-4019, United States v. Mincy in the criminal context covers only those processes rooted in history

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kennedy, Rehnquist, White, Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor, Souter, Blackmun, Stevens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

705 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

58 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Medina v. California

22 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.