About: Barefoot v. Estelle     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)

Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983), is a United States Supreme Court case. The Court ruled on the admissibility of clinical opinions given by two psychiatrists hired by the prosecution in answer to hypothetical questions regarding the defendant's future dangerousness and the likelihood that he would present a continuing threat to society in this Texas death penalty case. The American Psychiatric Association submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of the defendant's position that such testimony should be inadmissible and urging curtailment of psychiatric testimony regarding future dangerousness and a prohibition of such testimony based on hypothetical data.

AttributesValues
rdf:type
rdfs:label
  • Barefoot v. Estelle
rdfs:comment
  • Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983), is a United States Supreme Court case. The Court ruled on the admissibility of clinical opinions given by two psychiatrists hired by the prosecution in answer to hypothetical questions regarding the defendant's future dangerousness and the likelihood that he would present a continuing threat to society in this Texas death penalty case. The American Psychiatric Association submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of the defendant's position that such testimony should be inadmissible and urging curtailment of psychiatric testimony regarding future dangerousness and a prohibition of such testimony based on hypothetical data.
foaf:name
  • Thomas A. Barefoot, Petitioner v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
dct:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
sameAs
Concurrence
  • Stevens
Subsequent
  • Rehearing denied, .
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
loc
ArgueDate
  • --04-26
ArgueYear
case
  • Barefoot v. Estelle,
courtlistener
DecideDate
  • --07-06
DecideYear
findlaw
fullname
  • Thomas A. Barefoot, Petitioner v. W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent
Holding
  • There is no merit to petitioner's argument that psychiatrists, individually and as a group, are incompetent to predict with an acceptable degree of reliability that a particular criminal will commit other crimes in the future, and so represent a danger to the community.
justia
Litigants
  • Barefoot v. Estelle
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git81 as of Jul 16 2021


Alternative Linked Data Documents: PivotViewer | ODE     Content Formats:       RDF       ODATA       Microdata      About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3322 as of Sep 15 2021, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc25), Single-Server Edition (61 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2021 OpenLink Software