Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Brief of Amici Curiae Torture Experts International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, Bellevue/NYU Program for Survivors of Torture, Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, REDRESS, and World Organisation Against Torture in Support
The defendant claims she suffered torture and PTSD, impacting her mental state. She argues expert testimony on her psychological condition should have been allowed to show she lacked the required intent for the charges.
Sykes v. State
The DE Supreme Court ruled that judges must consider childhood abuse, trauma, and possible brain impairment during capital sentencing. Such evidence does not need to directly explain the offense.
Untested Assumptions: Psychological Research and Credibility Assessment in Legal Decision-Making
Trauma survivors often interact with the legal system. This paper examines how trauma research can improve justice in refugee law and sexual assault cases, especially when objective evidence is absent.
Jones v. GDCP Warden
The court ruled Jones was not entitled to a new trial. Even if lawyers failed to present evidence of childhood trauma, it likely would not have changed the verdict.
Anderson v. Sec’y
The appeals court upheld a death sentence. It found the defense conducted a reasonable investigation, and new claims of abuse and mental health issues likely would not have changed the sentence.
Montez v. Czerniak
The Oregon Supreme Court denied a death row inmate's appeal, ruling his lawyer reasonably presented evidence of PTSD. Claims that more trauma evidence should have been presented were rejected.
Davidson v. State
The Tennessee Supreme Court overturned a death sentence. The court found the defense lawyer failed to present evidence of the defendant's brain damage and mental illness.
United States v. Fields
The court ruled that a lawyer's failure to present mental illness evidence did not harm the defendant. Such evidence, while potentially mitigating, could also suggest future dangerousness.
Jordan v. Epps
The 5th Circuit denied a new trial. It found defense counsel's errors did not matter, as strong evidence supported the death penalty despite the defendant's PTSD claims.
Solitary Confinement and Risk of Self-Harm Among Jail Inmates
Inmates with serious mental illness, those aged 18 and younger, and individuals in solitary confinement face significantly higher risks of self-harm in correctional settings.
Walker v. Shult
The court ruled that extreme jail overcrowding, unsanitary conditions, and constant noise causing severe sleep loss could violate the Eighth Amendment, as sleep is essential.
Gissendaner v. Seaboldt
The court found lawyers were not ineffective for not presenting childhood sexual abuse evidence. PTSD diagnoses were unreliable, and the mitigation investigation was adequate.
Evans v. State
The MS Supreme Court reversed a murder conviction, ruling that denying funds for a PTSD expert violated due process. Expert testimony was needed to explain how the juvenile's trauma affected his mental state.
Stalcup v. State
A vehicular homicide conviction was reversed. The court found that excluding expert testimony on trauma, memory, and EMDR therapy was an error, as this evidence was reliable and central to the defense.
Asylum Seekers, Violence and Health: A Systematic Review of Research in High-Income Host Countries
Asylum seekers frequently experience violence and trauma, impacting their mental and physical health. Host countries often have stringent asylum processes and policies that may worsen health outcomes for this vulnerable population.