These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14968679)

  • 21. Sell v. United States: the appropriate standard for involuntarily administering antipsychotic drugs to dangerous detainees for trial.
    Borger BA
    Seton Hall Law Rev; 2005; 35(3):1099-120. PubMed ID: 16270457
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Forced medication of criminal defendants and the unintended consequences of Sell v. United States.
    Glasgow R
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 2005; 21(2):235-58. PubMed ID: 16050425
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Still stuck in the cuckoo's nest: why do courts continue to rely on antiquated mental illness research?
    Davoli JI
    Tenn Law Rev; 2002; 69(4):987-1050. PubMed ID: 15295857
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Forcible medication of mentally ill criminal defendants: the case of Russell Eugene Weston, Jr.
    Feinberg A
    Stanford Law Rev; 2002 Apr; 54(4):769-91. PubMed ID: 11944661
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. State can make inmate sane enough to execute.
    Liptak A
    N Y Times Web; 2003 Feb; ():A1, A27. PubMed ID: 12812158
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Restored to health to be put to death: reconciling the legal and ethical dilemmas of medicating to execute in Singleton v. Norris.
    Hensl KB
    Villanova Law Rev; 2004; 49(2):291-328. PubMed ID: 16485377
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Presumed dangerous: California's selective policy of forcibly medicating state prisoners with antipsychotic drugs.
    Gross DE
    Univ Calif Davis Law Rev; 2002 Jan; 35():483-517. PubMed ID: 17066562
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. US Supreme Court limits forced drugging of mentally ill before trial. But the court's new rules say that defendants can be forced to take drugs under limited conditions.
    Ashraf H
    Lancet; 2003 Jun; 361(9375):2131. PubMed ID: 12826441
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Competency courts: a creative solution for restoring competency to the competency process.
    Finkle MJ; Kurth R; Cadle C; Mullan J
    Behav Sci Law; 2009; 27(5):767-86. PubMed ID: 19784943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Between madness and death: the medicate-to-execute controversy.
    Latzer B
    Crim Justice Ethics; 2003; 22(2):3-14. PubMed ID: 15080128
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Forcing psychiatric drugs on defendants is weighed.
    Greenhouse L
    N Y Times Web; 2003 Mar; ():A18. PubMed ID: 12812160
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Protecting our mentally ill: a critique of the role of Indiana state courts in protecting involuntarily committed mental patients' right to refuse medication.
    Goff ML
    Indiana Law J; 2001; 76(4):983-1000. PubMed ID: 12455521
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. What medical school did you graduate from? Judicial prescribing of medical treatments.
    Miller RD
    J Psychiatry Law; 2000; 28(2):215-33. PubMed ID: 12546011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Guidelines for determining restorability of competency to stand trial and recommendations for involuntary treatment.
    Cochrane RE; Laxton KL; Mulay AL; Herbel BL
    J Forensic Sci; 2021 Jul; 66(4):1201-1209. PubMed ID: 34032278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Consent and the mentally disordered detained patient.
    Dimond B
    Br J Nurs; 2003 Dec 11-2004 Jan 7; 12(22):1331-4. PubMed ID: 14688654
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Constitutional law--substantive due process--Pennsylvania Supreme Court holds that criminal defendant's best interests justify forcible medication.--Commonwealth v. Sam, 952 A.2d 565 (Pa. 2008).
    Harv Law Rev; 2009 May; 122(7):1961-8. PubMed ID: 19492499
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Fourteenth amendment--the right to refuse antipsychotic drugs masked by prison bars.
    Sindel PE
    J Crim Law Criminol; 1991; 81(4):952-80. PubMed ID: 16145787
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Forcible administration of antipsychotic medication. State laws.
    Arkin HR
    JAMA; 1984 Nov; 252(18):2620-1. PubMed ID: 6149323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Justices restrict forced medication preceding a trial: mental competency issue. In 6-3 ruling, court says use of drugs must be in best interest of defendant.
    Greenhouse L
    N Y Times Web; 2003 Jun; ():A1, A20. PubMed ID: 14621709
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The US Supreme Court looks at voluntariness and consent.
    Miller RD
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 1994; 17(3):239-52. PubMed ID: 7995684
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.