Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Chain of custody testimony of each person who had

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: these questions. Issue: Was it permissible (under 704(b)) to ask the psychiatric expert whether "a person suffering from schizophrenia would be able to appreciate the nature of wrongfulness of his actions?" Holding: The trial court did not err in allowing the government to elicit the expert testimony objected to. Experts remain free to testify that the accused does or does not suffer from a mental disease or defect and to describe the characteristics and effects of such a disease or defect Just can't testify to the specific facts of the case "Can't say D did not appreciate his wrongfulness at the time of the action." Inadmissible: "A thinly veiled hypothetical may not be used to circumvent rule 704(b)" Ex: Exclusion of opinion testimony by a defense expert where counsel inquired as to the mental capacity of a hypothetical person with each of the pertinent characteristics of the defendant. Unable to conform your conduct to the law = factual conclusion Insane = legal conclusion. What Rule 704(b) does, is it basically restores the old common law...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online