The Millon™ Clinical Multiaxial Inventory Testing The Use And Validity Of The MCMI-III™ In Court CasesThe Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (“MCMI-III”™) is a popular assessment tool used by clinical psychologists, that has been in use since approximately 1977. This instrument has been the subject of many articles and books. The theoretical basis derives from Millon’s theory of personality development, personality types, and personality disorders. The instrument relies on 175 “self-report” true false questions, which are dependent upon a subject’s self awareness and providing accurate responses to the questions.  Similar to other testing instruments the Millon attempts to build in validity scales to account for any misrepresentation of symptoms and attempts to “detect” "invalid profiles.” The MCMI-III Manual itself specifically acknowledges “limitations and qualifications” regarding its use. The data derives from clinical sampling and “are applicable only to individuals who evidence problematic emotional and interpersonal symptoms or who are undergoing professional psychotherapy or a psycho diagnostic evaluation” and “the samples employed for such purposes are best drawn only from comparable clinical populations.” (T. Millon, R. Davis, P. Millon, , MCMI-III Manual, 2nd ed. (1997), at p. 6. It “is not a general personality instrument to be used with normal populations or for purposes other than diagnostic screening or clinical assessment.” Similar to the MMPI-2, the MCMI-III results may generate computer generated report, the manual itself cautions that “reading a computerized report is no substitute for clinical judgment. Only those trained in the limits of psychological tests are qualified to interpret them." Read More
Topics : Criminal Defense, Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), Scientific Evidence, Criminal Law, Psychological Test, discovery, Eric Marcy, Parole, Domestic Violence, Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP), Evidence, Healthcare, experts | 0 Comments Read More
When are Supervisors Liable for the Actions of Subordinates in Federal Civil Rights and Police Liability Cases?
When are Supervisors Liable for the Actions of Subordinates
in Federal Civil Rights and Police Liability Cases?
In Federal civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, supervisors are frequently named as defendants, even in circumstances were the supervisor was not directly involved or did not even have knowledge of the actions of the subordinate that gave rise to the claimed deprivation of civil rights. Shift Commanders, Lieutenants, Captains, Deputy Chiefs and Chiefs of Police are commonly named in “shotgun pleadings” when there has been a claim of excessive force or other alleged violation of Federal or Constitutional law. Supervisors should know when their conduct exposes them to liability for the actions of their subordinates and when it does not.Read More
Topics : Litigation, Use of Force, Federal Civil Rights, Criminal Defense, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, police, Constitutional Rights, Criminal Law, Due Process, Eric Marcy, law enforcement, Police Misconduct, Civil Rights Litigation | 0 Comments Read More
The Limits to Ordering Computer Monitoring as a Special Condition of Supervised Release in the Federal Court System
There are limits to when a Federal District Court Judge may order computer monitoring by United States Probation as a special condition of supervised release. While it can be argued that individuals on supervised release have a diminished expectation of privacy, wholesale unfettered access to a personal computer must still be balanced by assessing the nexus, proportionality, privileges, and the constitutional requirements that require that such intrusions be narrowly tailored.Read More
Topics : Community Supervision, Criminal Defense, Probation, Special Conditions of Supervised Release, Constitutional Rights, Criminal Law, Appeal, Due Process, Eric Marcy, NJ Criminal Justice Process, Parole, Federal Investigations, probation officer, probationer | 0 Comments Read More