By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//December 11, 2013//
U.S. Supreme Court
Criminal
Criminal Procedure — self-incrimination — psychiatric examinations
Where a defendant testifies and claims intoxication as a defense, it does not violate the Fifth Amendment to admit testimony regarding a court-ordered psychiatric examination in rebuttal.
The admission of rebuttal testimony under the rule of Buchanan harmonizes with the principle that when a defendant chooses to testify in a criminal case, the Fifth Amendment does not allow him to refuse to answer related questions on cross-examination. See Fitzpatrick v. United States, 178 U.S. 304. Here, the prosecution elicited testimony from its expert only after Cheever offered expert testimony about his inability to form the requisite mens rea. Excluding this testimony would have undermined Buchanan and the core truth-seeking function of trial.
295 Kan. 229, 284 P.3d 1007, vacated and remanded.
Sotomayor, J.