SAN DIEGO CRIMINAL DEFENSE NEWS: JUDGES CAN'T ORDER PSYCHIATRIC EXAMS ON CLIENTS
GOOD POST-VERDIN CASE; NO SHRINKING OUR CLIENTS DURING TRIAL
Here is a clear discovery win for the defense, although it is another affirmance of another deathpenalty case.
In Verdin (43 Cal.4th 1096), the California Supreme Court held that the discovery
statutes are the exclusive authorization for discovery orders directed to the defense, barring courts from making up ones not listed in Penal Code 1054.3.
In Verdin, the court said that prior to trial, judges can’t order your client to be “shrunk,” that is, examined by DA mental health experts, even though you put your client’s mental state in issue (with some exceptions).
But what about DURING trial? The Supremes say that Verdin controls! No court can order our client to submit to a mental health exam, even during trial. Nor can the DA then get a jury instruction or be allowed to argue that your refusal to submit to such an exam shows that your client is guilty.
On a second point, the recent Zamudio (43 C4th 327) case said that the DA could present evidence that an item had been provided to the defense laboratory. Here the prosecution asked the defense expert whether some of the defendant's blood sample had been released for independent analysis. The Supremes make the assumption that the DA's question to its expert about a defense test were erroneous, but find it harmless. Hey, at least they didn't say it was correct.
People v. Wallace; 2008 DJ DAR 12675; DJ, 8/15/08; Cal. Supremes
san diego criminal defense lawyer, san diego criminal defense news, san diego criminal defense attorney, san diego murder defense, san diego homicide defense, san diego domestic violence defense, san diego sex abuse defense, san diego child pornography defense, san diego crime defense, san diego civil rights attorney
