A competency-related evaluation looks at a defendant’s cognitive functioning, psychiatric symptoms, and decision-making abilities as they stand right now, in order to answer one specific question: can this person understand the legal proceedings against them and participate meaningfully in their own defense? It’s one of several forensic psychology evaluations Dr. Liebert conducts, distinct from a parental fitness evaluation or a psychological IME, which address different legal questions. Courts and attorneys order these evaluations when questions or concerns regarding a defendant’s present abilities arise. The evaluation is about present functioning only — it does not address what the person’s mental state was at the time of the alleged offense.

The Legal Question a Competency Evaluation Answers

A competency evaluation examines a current defendant’s cognitive functioning, psychiatric symptoms, and decision-making abilities, not as they existed at some earlier point in the case. That standard comes from the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dusky v. United States, which requires both a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings and an ability to consult with counsel.
## When Courts and Attorneys Order One
Courts and attorneys request a competency evaluation when there is a question about whether a defendant can proceed with the case against them. That question can arise for a range of reasons: a documented psychiatric history, confusion or disorientation observed by counsel, communication difficulties, or behavior during proceedings suggesting the person isn’t actually tracking what’s happening. The evaluation exists to give the court a clinically grounded answer to that specific concern.
## How the Court Uses the Findings
Findings from a competency evaluation help the court decide whether the case can move forward as scheduled, needs to be paused, or requires some other course of action. Sometimes the evaluation also identifies specific factors interfering with a defendant’s understanding or participation, information that can inform recommendations for addressing those barriers. The psychologist’s job, as in any forensic evaluation, is to provide a clinically grounded opinion. The ultimate legal determination of competency is made by the court, not the evaluator.
## Not the Same as an Evaluation of Criminal Responsibility
People sometimes lump competency together with other forensic assessments that sound related but ask entirely different questions. An evaluation of someone’s mental state at the time of an alleged offense is a different inquiry altogether. Competency is about present ability to participate in the proceedings themselves, nothing more. For any attorney weighing a forensic referral, the first step is figuring out exactly which legal question needs to be answered.
## Where Competency Fits Into a Criminal Case Timeline
A competency question can surface at almost any point in a criminal case. Sometimes it comes up early, when confusion or communication difficulties appear soon after arraignment. Other times it emerges later, once concerning behavior shows up as the case proceeds. When the court determines that competency is in question, proceedings are usually paused until the evaluation is finished and the question resolved.
## The Role of the Referring Attorney
An attorney submitting a competency referral shapes the evaluation from the outset by defining, as specifically as possible, what prompted the concern: confusion observed during meetings, a documented psychiatric history, communication difficulties, or something else entirely. Vague referrals slow the process down because the evaluator has to spend additional time narrowing the actual clinical question before the assessment itself can proceed efficiently. A well-specified referral, by contrast, lets the evaluation focus directly on the concern the court actually needs addressed.

Competency Evaluations for Juveniles

Competency questions aren’t limited to adult criminal proceedings. Juvenile courts apply their own version of the competency standard, generally accounting for developmental factors like age and cognitive maturity alongside any psychiatric or intellectual concerns. A competency evaluation in a juvenile matter follows a similar overall structure — clinical interview, records review, and standardized testing where indicated — but the analysis has to account for what’s developmentally typical at a given age, not just what would be expected of an adult defendant.

Records That Typically Inform a Competency Evaluation

Beyond the clinical interview itself, a competency evaluation usually draws on records connected to the specific concern raised in the referral: prior psychiatric treatment history, any relevant medical records, jail or facility mental health notes if the defendant is currently detained, and documentation of the behavior or communication difficulties that prompted the referral in the first place. Reviewing these sources alongside the interview gives the evaluator a fuller picture than a single conversation could provide on its own, and helps ground the eventual opinion in more than self-report.

Reassessment Over Time

Competency isn’t necessarily a one-time determination. If a defendant is found not competent and enters a restoration process, courts typically require periodic reassessment to track whether treatment is moving the person toward the level of understanding the legal standard requires. These follow-up evaluations use a methodology similar to the original one, updated to reflect the defendant’s current functioning rather than simply repeating the initial findings.

Coordinating Timeline With the Court

Because competency questions typically pause a pending case, scheduling matters. Attorneys and evaluators generally coordinate closely on timing so that the evaluation, and any necessary follow-up, moves as efficiently as the referral question allows without cutting corners on the assessment itself.

What a Finding of Competency Means Going Forward

When a defendant is found competent, the case simply proceeds on its normal schedule, without further involvement from the evaluator unless a new concern arises later in the proceedings. A finding of competency isn’t a broader statement about someone’s overall mental health or character; it’s a narrow, specific conclusion that the person currently has the understanding and capacity the legal standard requires to participate in their own defense. Everything else about how the case unfolds from there, strategy, plea decisions, trial preparation, remains between the defendant and their attorney.

Why the Evaluator’s Independence Matters

A competency evaluation carries weight with the court precisely because the evaluator has no stake in the outcome either way. The psychologist isn’t working for the defense or the prosecution; the clinically grounded opinion is meant to hold up regardless of which side requested the evaluation or what outcome either side might prefer. That independence is part of what the APA’s forensic guidelines are designed to protect, and it’s a large part of why courts rely on these evaluations to inform decisions that carry real consequences for how a case proceeds. That coordination is especially important in matters where a defendant is currently detained, since delays in scheduling can extend time spent in custody awaiting a resolution.

How to Refer a Competency Question

Courts and attorneys can contact the practice (https://liebertps.com/contact) to go over the specific question, timeline, and scope for a competency-related evaluation; inquiries generally get a response within about a day. If the case actually calls for a parental fitness evaluation (https://liebertps.com/parental-fitness-evaluation-what-to-expect/) or an independent medical examination (https://liebertps.com/psychological-independent-medical-examination-ime/) instead, both are covered on the practice’s forensic psychology page (https://liebertps.com/service/forensic-psychology/), along with how each differs from a competency referral.

Frequently Asked Questions: Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations

What exactly does a competency-to-stand-trial evaluation assess?

It looks at a defendant’s present cognitive functioning, psychiatric symptoms, and decision-making abilities, specifically whether they can understand the proceedings against them and participate meaningfully in their own defense.

Does this type of evaluation address what happened at the time of the alleged offense?

No. It focuses on present ability to understand and participate in proceedings. Mental state at the time of an alleged offense is addressed through separate evaluations entirely.

Who ultimately decides whether a defendant is competent to stand trial?

The court does. The evaluating psychologist provides a clinically grounded professional opinion that informs the court’s decision, but the legal determination itself belongs to the judge.

What happens if a defendant is found not competent to proceed?

The findings can point to specific factors interfering with the defendant’s understanding or participation, which may inform what the court does next. The legal process that follows from there is directed by the court and counsel.

How is this different from a criminal responsibility evaluation?

Competency addresses present ability to participate in proceedings. Criminal responsibility and related concepts, such as an extreme emotional disturbance defense, address a person’s mental state at the time of the alleged offense. Those are separate legal questions.

Does having a psychiatric diagnosis automatically make someone incompetent?

No. Competency looks at actual functioning, not diagnostic history alone. Plenty of people with serious psychiatric histories are fully capable of understanding proceedings and participating in their own defense.

What should an attorney include when making a competency referral?

A clear, specific description of the concern: confusion during interactions with counsel, a documented psychiatric history, or whatever else prompted the referral. That specificity helps the evaluator scope the assessment to the actual legal question.

Do competency rules vary from state to state?

The core legal standard applies nationally, but procedural rules, including timelines and what happens after a finding, vary by jurisdiction. That’s why referrals are coordinated closely with the referring attorney.

What happens to a case while the competency question is being resolved?

Proceedings are typically paused while the evaluation is completed and, if needed, while any restoration process and periodic reassessment take place. The court and counsel direct the procedural steps throughout.

How long does a competency evaluation take?

It depends on the complexity of the referral question, the availability of relevant records, and scheduling. Discussing the timeline with the evaluator and referring attorney at the outset helps set realistic expectations.

Is a competency evaluation the same as an insanity defense evaluation?

No. Competency addresses present ability to participate in proceedings. An insanity or criminal responsibility evaluation addresses a person’s mental state at the time of the alleged offense, a separate legal question entirely.