Cooper v. Oklahoma

Cooper v. Oklahoma
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued January 17, 1996 Decided April 16, 1996
Full case name	Bryon Keith Cooper, Petitioner v. Oklahoma
Citations	517 U.S. 348 (more) 116 S. Ct. 1373; 134 L. Ed. 2d 498; 1996 U.S. LEXIS 2649
Case history
Prior	Jury verdict of guilty; affirmed, Cooper v. State, 1995 OK CR 2, 889 P.2d 293; cert. granted, 516 U.S. 910 (1995).
Subsequent	None
Holding
Oklahoma's procedural rule that allows the State to try a defendant who is more likely than not incompetent violates due process. Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinion
Majority	Stevens, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Cooper v. Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 348 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court reversed an Oklahoma court decision holding that a defendant is presumed to be competent to stand trial unless he proves otherwise by the second highest legal standard of proof, that of clear and convincing evidence, ruling that to be unconstitutional.^[1] The court said the defendant's Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process were violated.^[2]

In this case, the defendant's ability to understand the charges against him and his ability to assist in his own defense was challenged on five separate occasions before and during his trial and sentencing for capital murder, but the trial judge ruled he was competent to stand trial because he did not meet Oklahoma's high standard of proof.^[1]