With the exponential growth of forensic psychology over recent decades, increasing numbers of clinical psychologists with little specialized training are becoming principal providers of forensic assessments. On the basis of results from an empirical study, the authors analyze 3 fundamental problems with these psychologists’ reports on competence to stand trial and provide recommendations for improvement based on legal, ethical, and professional standards of practice. The article focuses on the importance of (a) properly attending to the range of critical psycholegal abilities, including the defendant’s decisional capacities; (b) explaining the critical reasoning that underlies one’s psycholegal conclusions; and (c) using forensically relevant methods of assessment.