The Sell effect: involuntary medication treatment is a "clear and convincing" success.

Sell v. U.S.: involuntary treatment case or catalyst for change?

The 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sell v. U.S. dealt with the involuntary administration of antipsychotic medication to an incompetent pretrial defendant. The Court’s holding set forth what has quickly become known as the “Sell criteria.” These four criteria can be paraphrased as: (1) Did the defendant commit a serious crime? (2) Is there a substantial likelihood that involuntary medicati...

Sell v. U.S.: involuntary medication to restore trial competency--a workable standard?

Competency to Stand Trial (CST) evaluations are common in the U.S. criminal justice system. Of those defendants found Incompetent to Stand Trial (IST), psychotic disorders are the most common diagnoses, and active psychotic symptoms are strongly correlated with impairments in trial-related abilities. If a defendant is rendered IST because of psychosis, restoration will be unlikely without antip...

In Defense of Sell: Involuntary Medication and the Permanently Incompetent Criminal Defendant

United States v. Sell: involuntary administration of antipsychotic medication. Are you dangerous or not?

Adjusting Treatment for an Inmate-Patient Receiving Medication Involuntarily.

Correctional psychiatrists can pursue authorization for forcible medication of pretrial detainees housed in a federal prison hospital through two pathways: an administrative process based upon the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Washington v. Harper and a judicial process founded on the Court's ruling in Sell v. United States. The pathway associated with Harper pertains to the involuntary treatm...