Riggins v. Nevada: Defendants Don't Have to Take Antipsychotic Drugs During Trial

Riggins v. Nevada: Defendants Don't Have to Take Antipsychotic Drugs During Trial

Riggins v. Nevada

Timeline of History

History Topics
Countries

Decided: Riggins v. Nevada - In a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court overturns David Riggins' murder conviction because during this trial the state forced him to take antipsychotic drugs. This impaired his ability to testify on his own behalf.

According to the Court, defendants' constitutional rights would be protected so long as any medication they are forced to take is the "least intrusive" means for providing for competence and if the treament is "medically appropriate" for protecting both the defendants' safety as well as the safety of others.

Powered by JReviews

Today's Major Events

S.E. Cupp: I'd Never Vote for an Atheist President
Mormons of Caldwell County, Missouri, Drive Non-Mormons out of Daviess County
Death of Leo Strauss, German-American Philosopher Influential for Neo-Conservative Politics
L. Ron Hubbard Writes 'Fair Game' Letter on How to Deal With Critics Scientology
Charles Lindbergh Visits Germany, is Presented With Order of German Eagle by Göring

May History Calendar