Grading Scale - Jon Mandracchia, Ph.D.

PSY 440 – Forensic Psychology
Jan 10 – Jan 14, 2010
M-F, 8a-5p
Professor: Jon Mandracchia, PhD
E-Mail: [email protected]
Office: OMH 213B
Office Hours: By appointment
Required Texts:
Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2004). Psychology and law: Theory, research, and application
(3rd Edition). Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth.
Course Objectives:
The Forensic Psychology course is designed to introduce students to the application of
psychology within the legal and criminal justice systems. Students will be introduced to the
roles and responsibilities of psychologists working within and in conjunction with the legal and
criminal justice systems. Areas of focus include forensic psychological assessments, expert
testimony, correctional psychology, and offender treatment. The purpose of this course is to
increase students’ knowledge of, and ability to think critically about, psychology in the legal and
criminal justice systems.
Course Requirements:
There will be four exams, which will be given at the start of the day and will cover the material
and readings from the day before. Students will not be allowed make-up exams, with the
exception of an unexpected, documented, University-approved emergency. If a make-up exam is
allowed, it may be in a different form than the original exam (e.g., essay).
There will be one quiz, which will be given on the final day of the course and will cover the
assigned readings and the course materials for the final day.
Case Brief:
You are required to compose one legal case brief. The purpose of this assignment is to expose
you to case law that is relevant to a psychological issue, because case law directly influences
psycholegal concepts and how forensic psychologists function within the legal system. For this
assignment, you are to choose one of the legal cases listed below (case can be found on, read it in its entirety, and compose a one-page legal brief that
summarizes the case. An example case brief will be provided to you so that you may become
familiar with the format and style of a case brief. The case brief you turn in should be only one
side of one-page and be typed single-spaced and in 12pt Times New Roman font, 1” margins, etc
(no formatting tricks). Case briefs are due at the beginning of class on the assigned due date, and
will not be accepted late, nor will they be accepted via e-mail. Legal briefs that are plagiarized
in whole or in part will not be accepted, will be awarded zero points for the assignment, and may
result in other action, including (but not limited to) failure of the course (see Academic
Dishonesty section below).
Case Brief Presentation:
You are to give a brief presentation about the case you read for your case brief. This
presentation should last no more than 5 minutes. During the presentation, you are to convey the
key points of the case, which will likely be based heavily on your case brief (although
incorporating other fun/interesting/relevant facts from the case that would not fit into your case
brief is encouraged). This presentation is completely verbal – no handouts or visual aids are
required (although making a copy of your case brief to use during your presentation is
recommended, as you will have turned in your case brief to the instructor prior to the
presentation). Be prepared to answer questions about your case and participate in a brief
discussion about the case’s impact on the field of forensic psychology.
Class Participation:
 Due to the shortened nature of the course, your complete attendance and attention is
required for all class meetings in their entirety. You must arrive to class on time at the
start of the day and after any breaks. Absence from class will result in a deduction of
points. Specifically, 0.5% of the total possible points for the course will be deducted
from your grade for each 15 minutes of class you miss.
 During this course, you are responsible for all material covered in the lectures, class
discussions, handouts, and required readings. Unless otherwise indicated, read assigned
readings in their entirety.
 Your participation in class discussion is important, valued, and creates a more enjoyable
class. Participation can take several forms, including asking questions, offering
insightful comments on the readings, and responding to comments of your classmates.
Grading Scale
90% and up
below 60%
Exam 1
Exam 2
Exam 3
Exam 4
Case Brief
CB Presentation
82 points
100 points
100 points
100 points
34 points
100 points
50 points
566 points
*Grades will be rounded to the
nearest whole percent (i.e., .50 or
above is rounded up, less than .50 is
rounded down)
*No extra credit will be made
possible beyond that which is
initiated by the professor (if any).
Do not solicit the professor for extra
Students with Disabilities
If a student has a disability that qualifies under the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and
requires accommodations, he/she should contact the Office for Disability Accommodations
(ODA) for information on appropriate policies and procedures. Disabilities covered by ADA
may include learning, psychiatric, physical disabilities, or chronic health disorders. Students can
contact ODA if they are not certain whether a medical condition/disability qualifies:
The University of Southern Mississippi Office for Disability Accommodations
118 College Drive # 8586, Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001
Voice Telephone: (601) 266-5024 or (228) 214-3232 Fax: (601) 266-6035
Individuals with hearing impairments can contact ODA using the Mississippi Relay Service at
1-800-582-2233 (TTY) or email Suzy Hebert at [email protected]
Academic Dishonesty
Plagiarism is defined as passing off the ideas, words, or writings of another person as your own.
If you copy another person’s work and pass it off as your own, then you are committing
plagiarism even if you have the permission of the person. Plagiarism is a serious academic
offense because it undermines trust within the academic community and deters free exchange of
ideas. In addition, it is purposely lying about yourself and promoting a falsehood. It is expected
that students will take responsibility for doing their own work in an honest manner. Faculty
members are expected to enforce rigorously the University's Academic Honesty Policy. You
should make yourself familiar with this policy and understand the ramifications of cheating on an
exam or assignment or plagiarizing another’s work. Given the serious consequences associated
with this type of behavior, it is in your best interest to simply complete your own work and give
credit when using ideas that are not your own (i.e., using appropriate references). Academic
misconduct (e.g., cheating on exams or out-of-class assignments, plagiarism, etc.) will result in a
failing grade for that assignment at a minimum and further action may be taken, including failing
the course and/or reporting the academic misconduct to the University.
Other Course Policies
 Always be respectful of the professor and of other students. Disrespectful language and
disruptive behavior (including talking, laughing, whispering) will not be tolerated.
 Do not use your cell phone during class for any reason (i.e., calls, texting, internet, etc).
Either have your cell phone turned off or on silent mode during the class – even when set
to vibrate a cell phone can be a distraction.
 Use of a laptop computer is allowed for purposes related to the course, but should not be
used for reasons unrelated to the course (i.e., checking e-mail, instant messaging, visiting
non-related sites).
 Do not engage in other work or leisure activities during this class (e.g., coursework from
another class, activities related to your employment, listening to music, reading the
newspaper, playing Sudoku, etc.).
 The University does not allow you to bring your child with you to class or have your
child waiting in the hallway during class.
 You may be dismissed from class for any of the above reasons as deemed necessary and
appropriate by the professor. Dismissal from class will result in deduction of points as
described previously.
 Due to the nature of a minisession, this week will be very intense. Be prepared to
commit yourself completely to this course for the entire week, not just during the
scheduled hours of class attendance. Remember: you are attempting to get a semester’s
worth of class (and course credit) crammed into one week! Plan accordingly.
Legal Case Options for Case Brief
Evidentiary Standards
Frye v. US (1923)
Daubert v. Merrill Dow
Pharmaceuticals (1993)
*Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (1996)
General Electric v. Joiner (1997)
Foundations of Competency
Dusky v. US (1960)
Wieter v. Settle (1961)
Threshold Issues in Competency
Pate v. Robinson (1966)
Drope v. Missouri (1975)
Standard & Burden of Proof in Competency
Cooper v. Oklahoma (1996)
Medina v. California (1992)
Constitutional Issues in Competency
Faretta v. California (1975)
Seiling v. Eyman (1973)
Godinez v. Moran (1993)
Indiana v. Edwards (2008)
Constitutional Issues in Competency
Frendak v. US (1979)
US v. Marble (1991)
Colorado v. Connelly (1986)
North Carolina v. Alford (1970)
Amnesia and Competency
Wilson v. US (1968)
Competency Restoration Treatment
Jackson v. Indiana (1972)
US v. Duhon (2000)
US v. Sell (2003)
Development of the Insanity Defense
Durham v. US (1954)
MacDonald v. US (1962)
Washington v. US (1967)
US v. Brawner (1972)
Insanity Defense Reform Act (1984)
Wainwright v. Greenfield (1986)
Meaning of Wrongfulness
US v. Sullivan (1976)
US v. Segna (1977)
US v. Dubray (1988)
Detention of NGRI
Jones v. US (1983)
Foucha v. Louisiana (1992)
Risk Assessment
Tarasoff v. U. of California (1976)
McIntosh v. Milano (1976)
Lipari v. Sears v. US (1980)
Leedy v. Hartnet (1981)
Risk Assessment (cont’d)
Brady v. Hopper (1983)
Hedlund v. Orange County (1983)
Jablonski v. US (1983)
Davis v. Lhim (1983)
White v. US (1986)
Bradley v. Ray (1995)
Nasser v. Parker (1995)
Death Penalty
Ake v. Oklahoma (1985)
Ford v. Wainwright (1986)
Perry v. Louisiana (1990)
[and State v. Perry (1992)]
Singleton v. Norris (2003)
Atkins v. Virginia (2002)
Roper v. Simmons (2004)
Civil Commitment
Lessard v. Schmidt (1972)
O’Connor v. Donaldson (1975)
Addington v. Texas (1979)
Heller v. Doe (1993)
Vitek v. Jones (1980)
US v. Jimmy Jones (1987)
Zinermon v. Burch (1990)
Parham v. JR (1979)
Kansas v. Hendricks (1997)
Kansas v. Crane (2002)
Right to Treatment
Wyatt v. Stickney (1971)
[and Wyatt v. Aderhold (1974)]
Youngberg v. Romeo (1982)
Estelle v. Gamble (1976)
Right to Refuse Treatment
Kaimowitz v. Dept. of MH
for State of Michigan (1973)
Rogers v. Okin (1979)
Rennie v. Klein (1978)
Rivers v. Katz (1986)
Washington v. Harper (1990)
Riggins v. Nevada (1992)
1/11 Introduction/Syllabus
Defining Forensic Psychology
Intro to Psych & Law
Court Systems
Correctional Systems
Activities/Assignments Due
Psychological Assessment
Forensic Assessment
Criminal Competency
Criminal Responsibility
Criminal Profiling
Exam #1
Chapter 2 (p.32-49)
Chapter 2 (p.49-71)
Chapter 4 (p.103-117)
Chapter 4 (p.120-139)
Chapter 14 (p.473-478)
Expert Witnesses
Jury Procedures
Jury Decision Making
Psychology of Evidence
Police Psychology
Exam #2
Offender Assessment/Trtment
SVP Laws
Civil Commitment
Death Penalty
Exam #3
Criminal Behavior
Exam #4
Careers In Forensic Psychology Case Brief Due
Case Brief Presentation
Chapter 3 (p.94-102)
Chapter 6 (p.175-203)
Chapter 7 (p.204-225)
Chapter 9 (p.262-304)
Chapter 14 (p.453-457;
468-471; 486-493)
Chapter 10 (p.315-318;
Chapter 4 (p.168-172)
Chapter 5 (p.140-156)
Chapter 6 (p.184-188)
Chapter 10 (318-321)
Chapter 13 (p.408-418;
Chapter 1 (p.20-31)
Chapter 1 (p.1-19)
Chapter 3 (p.72-93)
Chapter 10 (p.305-312)