United States v. Loughner
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1DissentBerzon, Circuit Judge
Viewed realistically, what the majority holds is that the district court correctly abdicated to Loughner’s prison physicians the responsibility to determine whether he is to be restored to trial competency through involuntary medication. The form of the majority opinion obscures that holding, as it addresses first the quite separate question of the standards and procedures applicable to the mid-commitment decision to medicate a pretrial detainee for reasons of dangerousness. But that is not where we are now in this case. Instead, we are, principally, reviewing the district court’s decision as…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Washington v. HarperSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Riggins v. NevadaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Sell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- United States v. Patricia Campbell HearstCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.